RMDs not 75

[Anonymous]

The 401K was supposed to be for retirement, if you can wait till 75 to take your first RMD I doubt you really needed it. Actually you can double up the year after 75 so could wait all the way to 76 to take first RMD.

[Anonymous]

? ok, but if you have a lot in the 401K, your tax bracket is going to be higher at a time when you don't need that much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:? ok, but if you have a lot in the 401K, your tax bracket is going to be higher at a time when you don't need that much.

Who cares? If I get to the point that rmds are $400k I’ll be pretty happy.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for posting.

[Anonymous]

What do you mean by double up. Didn’t know about this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean by double up. Didn’t know about this

You can take at 75 or at 76 do a double payment for 75 and 76 after that once a year. But you have to pay more taxes in that year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean by double up. Didn’t know about this

You can take at 75 or at 76 do a double payment for 75 and 76 after that once a year. But you have to pay more taxes in that year

The tax hit on doubling up is why this practice is not recommended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The 401K was supposed to be for retirement, if you can wait till 75 to take your first RMD I doubt you really needed it. Actually you can double up the year after 75 so could wait all the way to 76 to take first RMD.

The only people who won't/shouldn't touch their 401K before 75 are those who have other income streams (e.g. pensions, rentals, dividends). Otherwise, it makes sense to take money out of the 401k (or IRA) vs. liquidating assets in brokerage accounts. Those assets will pass on to heirs with basis adjusted and are not subject to RMD.

[Anonymous]

What really matters is your heirs’ tax bracket compared to your own. When you’re in your 60s & 70s it should be pretty clear by that point which generation should be paying the taxes (at the cheapest rate possible). If your kids have a really high income, leaving them tax-deferred 401ks and IRAs could be a huge tax bomb that they can’t avoid for a decade…meanwhile if your kids are very low earners you should leave them as much tax deferred money as possible since it could end up completely tax free with some planning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What really matters is your heirs’ tax bracket compared to your own. When you’re in your 60s & 70s it should be pretty clear by that point which generation should be paying the taxes (at the cheapest rate possible). If your kids have a really high income, leaving them tax-deferred 401ks and IRAs could be a huge tax bomb that they can’t avoid for a decade…meanwhile if your kids are very low earners you should leave them as much tax deferred money as possible since it could end up completely tax free with some planning.

You give it directly to grandkids I guess. Kids today are lazy so odds they will make less. Gen z is very very nice but my kids are into doing good, work life balance, education, pursuing a career they love.

My generation I literally killed lab animals in 10th grade as a part time job for 50 cents more an hour than fast food work. It was always money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The 401K was supposed to be for retirement, if you can wait till 75 to take your first RMD I doubt you really needed it. Actually you can double up the year after 75 so could wait all the way to 76 to take first RMD.

If I were you I would take some money, from whatever source, and invest it in some English classes so you don't have to communicate in gibberish. Yeesh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 401K was supposed to be for retirement, if you can wait till 75 to take your first RMD I doubt you really needed it. Actually you can double up the year after 75 so could wait all the way to 76 to take first RMD.

If I were you I would take some money, from whatever source, and invest it in some English classes so you don't have to communicate in gibberish. Yeesh.

27 Word Sentence!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 401K was supposed to be for retirement, if you can wait till 75 to take your first RMD I doubt you really needed it. Actually you can double up the year after 75 so could wait all the way to 76 to take first RMD.

If I were you I would take some money, from whatever source, and invest it in some English classes so you don't have to communicate in gibberish. Yeesh.

27 Word Sentence!

Not spelling out a number, invalid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What really matters is your heirs’ tax bracket compared to your own. When you’re in your 60s & 70s it should be pretty clear by that point which generation should be paying the taxes (at the cheapest rate possible). If your kids have a really high income, leaving them tax-deferred 401ks and IRAs could be a huge tax bomb that they can’t avoid for a decade…meanwhile if your kids are very low earners you should leave them as much tax deferred money as possible since it could end up completely tax free with some planning.

You give it directly to grandkids I guess. Kids today are lazy so odds they will make less. Gen z is very very nice but my kids are into doing good, work life balance, education, pursuing a career they love.

My generation I literally killed lab animals in 10th grade as a part time job for 50 cents more an hour than fast food work. It was always money.

Kristi Noem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 401K was supposed to be for retirement, if you can wait till 75 to take your first RMD I doubt you really needed it. Actually you can double up the year after 75 so could wait all the way to 76 to take first RMD.

The only people who won't/shouldn't touch their 401K before 75 are those who have other income streams (e.g. pensions, rentals, dividends). Otherwise, it makes sense to take money out of the 401k (or IRA) vs. liquidating assets in brokerage accounts. Those assets will pass on to heirs with basis adjusted and are not subject to RMD.

Yeah but assets from the brokerage account may be taxed as long term cap gains, or even better, maybe you can harvest losses. The money out of an IRA is taxed at your current income rate which is often higher than cap gains. An IRA can be passed to a spouse and can be passed to heirs as well.

You may want to even consider using some of that brokerage money to pay the taxes on a Roth conversion.

Really better to look at your individual situation than to make a blanket pronoucement about not touching a 401k and favoring a taxable account.