Tag: adjusted gross income

Categories
Roth IRA

5 Ways to Reduce Your Tax Liability Using Roth IRA Conversions

One of the most important financial goals for retirees is maximization of after-tax income. There are two ways to accomplish this: (a) maximize pre-tax income and (b) minimize income tax liability. A Roth IRA can go a long way toward helping you achieve the latter.

There are two ways to fund a Roth IRA: (a) annual contributions and (b) conversions. Annual contributions, in and of themselves, generally won’t result in a significant source of retirement income due to the relatively low limitation – currently $5,500 or $6,500 if you’re age 50 or older. In addition, eligibility to make Roth IRA contributions is limited to the extent that your income exceeds defined limits.

Roth IRA conversions, on the other hand, have the ability to generate substantial after-tax income while also reducing income tax liability for up to 20 to 30 years or more of retirement. Since income tax liability on the value of Roth IRA conversions will need to be paid, timing of conversions is key. See the May 10, 2010 post, Be on the Lookout for Roth IRA Conversion Opportunities, for a discussion of this topic.

There are five ways that you can potentially reduce your income tax liability and increase your after-tax income during your retirement years by doing Roth IRA conversions.

1. Never pay income tax on the growth of your Roth IRA

While you’re required to include the value of your IRA, 401(k) or other qualified plan assets that you convert to a Roth IRA in your taxable income in the year of conversion, 100% of the growth of your Roth IRA is excluded from taxation. This is true whether or not you ever take any distributions from your Roth IRA.

Individuals who did Roth IRA conversions in March, 2009 when the Dow dipped below 7,000 didn’t mind paying income tax on those conversions in retrospect given the fact that the Dow is currently hovering over 17,000 less than six years later. The income tax savings on the growth of the equity portion of their converted accounts over this period of time plus future potential growth is significant for those in this situation.

2. Roth IRA accounts aren’t subject to required minimum distribution rules

If you don’t do a Roth IRA conversion, 100% of the value of your traditional IRA, 401(k), and other qualified plan assets, including appreciation, will be subject to IRS’ required minimum distribution, or RMD, rules. These rules require you to take annual minimum distributions from your retirement plan accounts beginning by April 1st of the year following the year that you turn 70-1/2. 100% of distributions reduced by any allowable portion of nondeductible contributions are taxable.

As an example, suppose you were born on January 7, 1940 and you own a traditional IRA account with a value of $500,000 on December 31, 2013, you would be required to take a minimum distribution of $21,008.40 from your account by December 31, 2014 and include it in your 2014 taxable income. If instead you owned a Roth IRA account with the same value, you wouldn’t be required to take any distributions from your account.

3. Potentially reduce net investment income tax

The RMD rules sometimes force people to take distributions from their taxable IRA accounts that they don’t need. Often times, they transfer RMDs from their taxable IRA account to a nonretirement investment account and leave them there. For individuals with high levels of income, this can result in additional taxation as a result of subjecting the earnings on their nonretirement account to the net investment income tax of 3.8%. This isn’t an issue for Roth IRA account holders since the RMD rules don’t apply to them.

4. Roth IRA distributions aren’t included when calculating taxable Social Security benefits

The taxation of Social Security benefits is dependent upon your combined income and tax filing status. Combined income includes adjusted gross income, nontaxable interest, and 50% of Social Security benefits.

Single filers are subject to tax on 50% of their Social Security benefits for combined income between $25,000 and $34,000 and up to 85% of benefits when combined income exceeds $34,000. Married filing joint taxpayers are subject to tax on 50% of their Social Security benefits for combined income between $32,000 and $44,000 and up to 85% of benefits when combined income exceeds $44,000.

Roth IRA distributions aren’t included in adjusted gross income, therefore, they don’t affect taxation of Social Security benefits.

5. More opportunities for income tax bracket planning

For all taxpayers, taxable income is subject to seven different rates of tax ranging from 10% to 39.6% depending upon the amount of taxable income. Given the foregoing four potential ways of reducing taxable income and associated income tax liability, Roth IRA conversions can also reduce the income tax rates that are used to calculate income tax liability on other sources of income. This allows for more opportunities for income tax bracket planning to potentially further reduce income tax liability in one or more years.

Although it’s not income-tax related, one other potential benefit of Roth IRA conversions that shouldn’t be overlooked is their impact on the calculation of Medicare Part B premiums. Monthly Medicare Part B premiums currently range from $104.90 to $335.70 depending upon tax filing status and the amount of modified adjusted gross income from two years ago. Roth IRA distributions aren’t included in the calculation of adjusted gross income. As such, they don’t affect the amount of Medicare Part B premiums paid.

As you can see, assuming (a) you can get over the hurdle of prepaying a portion of your income tax liability when you do Roth IRA conversions and (b) you have sufficient nonretirement funds to pay the tax, this can create several tax reduction opportunities as well as a potential reduction of Medicare Part B premiums throughout your retirement years. These benefits, combined with the ability to eliminate taxation on the growth of Roth IRA accounts, can result in greater and longer-lasting after-tax retirement income compared to not doing any Roth IRA conversions.

Categories
Income Tax Planning

New Tax Law – Don’t Let the Tax Tail Wag the Dog – Part 2 of 2

Part 1 of this post focused on the two investment-related tax areas of the new tax law that went into effect on January 1st – (a) the Medicare investment income tax and (b) long-term capital gains and qualified dividends. It made the point that while the amount of potential income tax liability resulting from exposure to one or both of these changes may be significant, neither one in and of itself, or in combination for that matter, should cause you to overhaul an otherwise appropriate retirement income planning investment strategy.

After preparing income tax projections using current vs. prior tax law, your CPA or other income tax professional will be able to determine two things: (a) the total amount of your additional projected income tax liability attributable to various changes in the law, and (b) the amount of your additional projected income tax liability attributable to specific changes in the law, including the Medicare investment income tax and 20% long-term capital gains and qualified dividends tax.

Once you determine the amount of your projected income tax liability attributable to specific changes in the law, the next step is to determine (a) the applicable income threshold type and amount that you have exceeded, and (b) the projected amount of excess income over the applicable threshold amount. In the case of the Medicare investment income tax, the threshold type is modified adjusted gross income (“MAGI”) and the amount is $200,000 if single or $250,000 if married filing joint. If your additional projected income tax liability is attributable to long-term capital gains and/or qualified dividends, the threshold type is taxable income and the amount is $400,000 if single or $450,000 if married filing joint.

Whether you’re affected by the Medicare investment income tax or the 20% (vs. 15%) tax on long-term capital gains and dividends, the next step is to determine the various components of income that comprise your gross income. Once you do this, you need to determine which specific non-investment related components can be reduced, as well as the amount of reductions for each component, in order to reduce the amount of your projected income tax liability attributable to changes in the tax law.

It’s important to keep in mind that some types of income can be reduced indirectly. An example of this is taxable salary which can be reduced significantly by various types of pre-tax deductions as available, including, but not limited to, 401(k) plan and cafeteria plan contributions. Another example is self-employment income which can be reduced by self-employment expenses.

In addition to determining which specific non-investment related components can be reduced, it’s also important to determine if any losses can be created or freed up as another means of reducing gross income. This can include capital losses to offset capital gains, net operating losses, as well as passive activity loss carryovers that can be freed up as a result of the sale of a rental property. The latter strategy can be a double-edged sword since this may also result in a capital gain that may increase exposure to the Medicare investment income tax and/or the 20% capital gains tax.

Since the starting point for determining exposure to both the Medicare investment income tax and 20% capital gains tax calculations is adjusted gross income (“AGI”), the next step is to determine potential deductions for AGI, or “above-the-line” deductions, that you may not be currently taking advantage of. This includes self-employed retirement plan contributions, self-employed health insurance premiums, and health savings account (“HSA”) contributions, to name a few.

If your issue is the 20% capital gains tax, in addition to reducing your AGI, there’s another way that you can potentially reduce your exposure to this tax and retain the 15% favorable capital gains tax. Keeping in mind that the threshold type in the case of the 20% capital gains tax is taxable income which is calculated by subtracting itemized deductions and personal exemptions from AGI, you may be able to increase your itemized deductions in order to reduce your taxable income.

As you can see, there are things you can do to reduce your exposure to the Medicare investment income tax and 20% capital gains tax without changing your investment strategy. If you have an otherwise appropriate retirement income planning investment strategy, don’t let the tax tail wag the dog.

Categories
Income Tax Planning

New Tax Law – Don’t Let the Tax Tail Wag the Dog – Part 1 of 2

The new tax law which went into effect on January 1st, which is actually a combination of provisions from two different tax bills – the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA) and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 – penalizes individuals with certain types and amounts of income. See parts 1 and 2 of The 2013 Tax Law Schizophrenic Definition of Income published on January 7th and January 14th for a discussion of the affected income types and threshold amounts, including a summary table of same.

As pointed out in the two posts, there are now five different definitions of income affecting seven different tax areas as a result of the new legislation. What I have found interesting as a CPA retirement income planner is the fact that while only two of the seven affected tax areas are directly related to investments, these two areas have commanded the vast majority of the media’s attention to date.

The two investment-related tax areas, both of which were discussed in detail in the two posts, are (a) the Medicare investment income tax and (b) long-term capital gains and qualified dividends. The Medicare investment income tax affects those with modified adjusted gross income (“MAGI”) in excess of $200,000 if single or $250,000 if married filing joint while long-term capital gains and qualified dividends are problematic if taxable income exceeds $400,000 if single or $450,000 if married filing joint.

The penalty for crossing these thresholds is 3.8% of the lesser of net investment income or MAGI in excess of the specified threshold amounts in the case of the new Medicare investment income tax and a 20% vs. 15% tax rate on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends. While the amount of potential additional income tax liability resulting from exposure to one or both of these changes may be significant, neither one in and of itself, or in combination for that matter, should cause you to overhaul an otherwise appropriate retirement income planning investment strategy.

As with all major tax law changes, and I’ve been through many, including the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA), the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (TRA), and the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRA), to name a few of the biggies, the first step in evaluating how the legislation will affect you is to prepare an income tax projection for the current and future tax years. The number of years that you choose to include in your projection depends upon a number of factors that are beyond the scope of this post. Needless to say, preparation of your projection by a CPA specializing in income taxation or by another income tax professional is recommended.

In order to determine how specific tax law changes will affect you, a baseline tax projection using prior law before the various changes took effect should be prepared. The next step is to prepare a projection under the new tax law. This will enable you to determine the total amount of your additional projected income tax liability attributable to various changes in the law. Once you know this, you can fine tune your analysis to determine the amount of additional projected income tax liability attributable to specific individual changes in the law. Your analysis should include types of income, affected tax areas, and additional income tax liability resulting from exceeding specified threshold amounts.

Assuming that your income tax projection reveals that you’re projected to incur more than a nominal amount of additional income tax liability that’s attributable to various types and amounts of investment income, you need to read Part 2 of this post in order to learn what to do next.

Categories
Income Tax Planning

The 2013 Tax Law Schizophrenic Definition of Income – Part 2 of 2

Per last week’s blog, as a result of President Obama’s signing on January 2nd of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 following changes legislated by the 2010 Health Care Reform Act effective beginning in 2013, there are now five different definitions of income affecting seven different tax areas. Exhibit 1, which was also included in last week’s post, summarizes 2013 individual federal income-based tax law changes, comparing each one with the law in effect in 2012.

Please see last week’s post for a discussion of the first three definitions of income. This week’s post examines the last two.

Adjusted Gross Income Exceeding $250,000 or $300,000

Once your adjusted gross income (AGI) exceeds $250,000 if single or $300,000 if married filing jointly, your income tax liability will increase as a result of two affected tax areas: (1) Itemized deductions limitation and (2) Personal exemption phaseout. Although neither of these provisions was effective in 2012, both have been part of prior years’ tax law.

Itemized Deductions Limitation

The limitation on itemized deductions, known as Pease after the congressman who helped create it, was originally part of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, was phased out beginning in 2006, and was repealed in 2010.

Back in 2013, the itemized deductions limitation reduces most otherwise allowable itemized deductions by 3% of the amount by which AGI exceeds the specified threshold of $250,000 or $300,000, depending upon whether you’re filing as a single or married filing joint taxpayer. Itemized deductions can’t be reduced by more than 80%. In addition, the reduction doesn’t apply to deductions for medical expenses, investment interest, casualty and theft losses, and gambling losses.

Personal Exemption Phaseout

The personal exemption phaseout is another reincarnation of prior tax legislation. Since 1990, the personal exemption has been phased out at higher income levels. The 2001 tax act phased out the phaseout beginning in 2006 with repeal in 2010.

Back in 2013, 2% of the personal exemption amount, projected to be $3,900, is eliminated for each $2,500 of AGI in excess of $250,000 for single filers and $300,000 for those using married filing joint tax filing status.

Taxable Income Exceeding $400,000 or $450,000

Welcome to 2013 tax law income definition #5 affecting two more income tax areas. If your taxable income exceeds $400,000 if single or $450,000 if married filing jointly, your income tax liability will be further increased by two different tax provisions: (1) Income tax bracket and (2) Long-term capital gains and qualified dividends.

Income Tax Bracket

The top tax bracket of 35%, which was in effect from 2003 through 2012, jumps by 4.6% to 39.6% beginning in 2013 for those individuals whose taxable income exceeds the single and married filing joint thresholds of $400,000 or $450,000, respectively. The last time that the 39.6% rate was part of the tax law and was also the top tax rate was in 2000.

Long-Term Capital Gains and Qualified Dividends

Beginning in 1982, tax rate reductions reduced the tax rate on long-term capital gains, i.e., capital gain income from assets held longer than one year, from 28% to a maximum of 20%. The rate was further reduced from 20% to 15% beginning in 2003 and also began applying to qualified dividends.

The 20% maximum rate on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends has returned in 2013 for those individuals whose taxable income exceeds the $400,000 or $450,000 threshold depending upon filing status.

Summary

With the exception of the Medicare Earned Income Tax and Medicare Investment Income Tax discussed in last week’s post, the other five affected tax areas resulting in higher federal income taxes in 2013 are reincarnations of prior tax law. Everyone with employment or self-employment income of any amount with limited exception will pay more tax in 2013 than they did in 2012, all else being equal. In addition, income tax liability will increase for anyone with certain types of income exceeding specified thresholds starting at $200,000 or $250,000 depending upon filing status. The cumulative effect of the various changes and associated increase in federal income tax liability will be significant for many people.

Categories
Income Tax Planning

The 2013 Tax Law Schizophrenic Definition of Income – Part 1 of 2

QUOTED AND LINKED IN JANUARY 11, 2013 WALL STREET JOURNAL

And you thought that the tax law was already too complex. As a result of President Obama’s signing on January 2nd of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 following changes legislated by the 2010 Health Care Reform Act effective beginning in 2013, there are now five different definitions of income affecting seven different tax areas.

With a schizophrenic name (“Taxpayer Relief Act”), this comes as no surprise.

Although the most publicized affected income level is individuals with taxable income exceeding $400,000 for single tax filers and $450,000 for married filing joint tax filers, everyone with employment or self-employment income of any amount with limited exceptions will pay more tax in 2013 than they did in 2012, all else being equal.

Exhibit 1 summarizes 2013 individual federal income-based tax law changes, comparing each one with the law in effect in 2012. The five different definitions of income are as follows, with dollars amounts depending upon single vs. married filing joint tax status with the exception of #1 which applies to everyone with earned income with limited exceptions:

  1. Earned income of between $0 and $113,700
  2. Earned income and modified adjusted gross income exceeding $200,000 or $250,000
  3. Modified adjusted gross income exceeding $200,000 or $250,000
  4. Adjusted gross income exceeding $250,000 or $300,000
  5. Taxable income exceeding $400,000 or $450,000

The first three definitions of income will be discussed in the remainder of this post, with the last two deferred to next week’s post.

Earned Income Between $0 and $113,700

The employee Social Security tax rate which was reduced from 6.2% to 4.2% for 2011 and 2012 is back to 6.2% beginning in 2013. In addition, the Social Security wage base, which was $106,800 in 2010 and 2011 and $110,100 in 2012 is $113,700 in 2013. This translates to a Social Security tax increase of $2,425.20 in 2013 vs. 2012 for individuals with Social Security wages of at least $113,700, with the tax going from $4,624.20 (110,100 x 4.2%) in 2012 to $7,049.40 ($113,700 x 6.2%) in 2013.

Earned Income and Modified Adjusted Gross Income Exceeding $200,000 or $250,000

In recent years, everyone with earned income has been subject to Medicare tax at a rate of 1.45% on all earned income with limited exceptions. Beginning in 2013, the rate is increased by 0.9% to 2.35% on earned income exceeding $200,000 if single or $250,000 if married filing joint if modified adjusted gross income (“MAGI”) also exceeds the specified threshold amounts. MAGI is adjusted gross income (“AGI”) with certain adjustments, the details of which are beyond the scope of this post.

Modified Adjusted Gross Income Exceeding $200,000 or $250,000

The first two definitions of income are dependent upon the presence of earned income. It doesn’t matter if you have any earned income for purposes of meeting the next three definitions of income. If your MAGI exceeds $200,000 if single or $250,000 if married filing joint, and you have investment income, you will be subject to the new Medicare investment income tax. The tax is assessed at a rate of 3.8% on the lesser of net investment income or MAGI in excess of the specified threshold amounts. Net investment income includes taxable interest, dividends, and capital gains.

If you have income of at least $100,000 and you haven’t retired TurboTax and rehired your CPA yet, I’ll guarantee you will do so after reading part 2 of this post.

Categories
Annuities Deferred Income Annuities Fixed Index Annuities

Invest in DIA to Fund LTCI Premiums When Retired – Part 4 of 4

The first three posts in this series discussed five differences between fixed index annuities (“FIA’s”) with income riders and deferred income annuities (“DIA’s”) that will influence which retirement income planning strategy is preferable for funding long-term care insurance (“LTCI”) premiums in a given situation. If you haven’t done so already, I would recommend that you read each of these posts.

This week’s post presents a sample case to illustrate the use of a FIA with an income rider vs. a DIA to fund LTCI premiums during retirement.

Assumptions

As with all financial illustrations, assumptions are key. A change in any single assumption will affect the results. The following is a list of assumptions used in the sample case:

  1. 55-year old, single individual
  2. Planned retirement start age of 68
  3. Life expectancy to age 90
  4. Current annual LTCI premium of $4,000 payable for life
  5. Need to plan for infrequent, although potentially double-digit percentage increases in LTCI premium at unknown points in time
  6. Given assumptions #4 and #5, plan for annual pre-tax income withdrawals of approximately $6,000 beginning at retirement age
  7. Solve for single lump sum investment at age 55 that will provide needed income
  8. Investment will come from a nonqualified, i.e., nonretirement, investment account
  9. One investment option is a fixed index annuity (“FIA”) with an income rider with lifetime income withdrawals beginning at age 68.
  10. Second investment option is a deferred income annuity (“DIA”) with no death benefit and lifetime income payout beginning at age 68.
  11. FIA premium bonus of 10%
  12. FIA annual return of 3%
  13. FIA income rider charge of 0.95% of income rider value otherwise known as the guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefit (“GMWB”)
  14. No withdrawals are taken from the FIA other than the income withdrawals.
  15. All investments are purchased from highly-rated life insurance companies known for providing innovative and competitive retirement income planning solutions.

Investment Amount

The first thing that needs to be solved for is the amount of investment that must be made at the individual’s age 55 in order to produce lifetime annual income of approximately $6,000 beginning at age 68. The goal is to minimize the amount of funds needed for the investment while choosing a strategy from a highly-rated insurance company that’s known for providing innovative and competitive retirement income planning solutions.

It turns out that an investment of $50,000 to $65,000 is needed to produce lifetime annual income of approximately $6,000 beginning at age 68. Given the fact that my goal as a retirement income planner is to use the smallest amount of investment for a fixed income annuity to produce a targeted income stream in order to preserve the remainder of a client’s investment portfolio for my client’s other financial goals, the amount of the investment needed is $50,000.

Results

There are three items we will examine to compare the results between investing $50,000 in a FIA with an income rider vs. a DIA to fund LTCI premiums during retirement. They are as follows:

  • Annual gross income
  • Annual taxable income
  • Value/death benefit

Annual Gross Income

Per the Exhibit, the annual payout, or gross income, from the FIA is $5,764, or $236 less than the annual gross income of $6,000 from the DIA. This equates to a total of $5,428 for the 23 years of payouts from age 68 through age 90.

Annual Taxable Income

If the investment was made in a retirement account like a traditional IRA and assuming there have been no nondeductible contributions made to the IRA, 100% of the income would be taxable. This would be the case for both the FIA or DIA.

As stated in assumption #8, the investment will come from a nonqualified, i.e., nonretirement, investment account. Per Part 2 of this series, this makes a difference when it comes to taxation of the withdrawals. Per the Exhibit, 100% of the annual FIA income of $5,764 is fully taxable vs. $3,066 of the DIA income. This is because the DIA, unlike the FIA, is being annuitized and approximately 50% of each income payment is nontaxable as a return of principal. Over the course of 23 years of payouts, this results in $62,054 of additional taxable income for the FIA vs. the DIA.

The amount of income tax liability resulting from the additional taxable income from the FIA will be dependent upon several factors that will vary each year, including (a) types, and amounts, of other income, (b) amount of Social Security income, (c) potential losses, (d) adjusted gross income, (e) itemized deductions, (f) marginal tax bracket, and (g) applicable state income tax law.

Value/Death Benefit

While the present value of the future income stream of a DIA represents an asset, you generally won’t receive an annual statement from the life insurance company showing you the value of your investment. In addition, while some DIA’s will pay a death benefit in the event that the annuitant dies prior to receiving income, per assumption #10, this isn’t the case in this situation. Consequently, the DIA column of the “Value/Death Benefit” section of the Exhibit is $0 for each year of the analysis.

On the other hand, there’s a projected value for the FIA from age 55 through age 79. This value is also the amount that would be paid to the FIA’s beneficiaries in the event of death. There’s a projected increase in value each year during the accumulation stage between age 55 and 67 equal to the net difference between the assumed annual return of 3% and the income rider charge of 0.95% of the income rider value.

Per the Exhibit, the projected value/death benefit increases from $56,278 at age 55 to $68,510 at age 67. Although the assumed premium bonus of 10% is on the high side these days, this is reasonable given the fact that FIA values never decrease as a result of negative performance of underlying indexes, the assumed rate of return of 3% is reasonable in today’s low index cap rate environment, and the assumed income rider charge of 0.95% of the income rider value is on the upper end of what’s prevalent in the industry. The projected value/death benefit decreases each year from age 68 to age 79 until it reaches $0 beginning at age 80 as a result of the annual income withdrawals of $5,764.

Conclusion

As discussed in Parts 1 – 3 of this series, there are five important differences between FIA’s with income riders and DIA’s that will influence which retirement income planning strategy is preferable for funding LTCI premiums during retirement in a given situation. Two of the differences, income start date flexibility and income increase provision, haven’t been addressed in this post.

In addition to the five differences, the amount of the investment required to produce a targeted lifetime annual income amount to pay LTCI premiums, including potential increases, will differ depending upon the particular FIA or DIA strategy used. In the illustrated case, which isn’t uncommon today, an investment of $50,000 resulted in an almost identical lifetime income payout whether a FIA with an income rider or a DIA is used.

As illustrated, the taxable income associated with a DIA in a nonqualified environment is much less compared to a FIA. As previously discussed, the amount of tax savings resulting from the reduced taxable income will depend upon an analysis of several factors and will vary each year. Ignoring the potential income tax savings resulting from the tax-favored DIA payouts, the FIA with income rider would be the preferred investment choice for many individuals in this case given the presence, duration, and projected amount of, the investment value/death benefit.

The FIA edge is reinforced by the fact that, unlike most traditional DIA’s, the income start date and associated annual lifetime income payout amount for FIA’s is flexible. This would be an important consideration in the event that the year of retirement changes. Furthermore, this is quite possible given the fact that the individual is 13 years away from her projected retirement year.

As emphasized throughout this series, the purchase of LTCI needs to be a lifetime commitment. Planning for the potential purchase of a LTCI policy should be included as part of the retirement income planning process to determine the sources of income that will be used to pay for LTCI throughout retirement. Whether it’s a FIA with an income rider, a DIA, or some other planning strategy that’s used for this purpose will depend on the particular situation.

Categories
Roth IRA Social Security

Roth IRA Conversions – Don’t Let the Tax Tail Wag the Dog – Part 5 of 6

Retirement Income Center

Parts 3 and 4 of this series addressed the first two of three primary economic benefits associated with a Roth IRA conversion: (1) elimination of taxation on 100% of the growth of Roth IRA conversion assets and (2) elimination of exposure to required minimum distributions, with the first one being the most important and overriding reason in most cases for doing a conversion. This post discusses the third and final benefit – potential reduction in taxation of Social Security benefits.

Economic benefit #3 has intentionally been saved for last. Unlike the first two benefits which will occur provided there is an increase in the value of the Roth IRA after the conversion (benefit #1) and you live until at least age 70-1/2 and you haven’t depleted your traditional IRA (benefit #2), reduction in taxation of Social Security benefits is less certain. This is why this benefit is prefaced by the word, “potential.”

As we know from reading the two-part series, Say Goodbye to Up to 30% of Your Social Security Benefits that was published on January 10, 2011 and January 17, 2011, you can lose up to 30% of your Social Security benefits to federal income tax. Per the series, the amount of benefits subject to tax in a particular year is dependent upon four factors: (1) tax filing status, (2) total amount of Social Security benefits received, (3) adjusted gross income, and (4) tax-exempt income. Generally speaking, factor #3 is the most important one in determining the percentage of benefits that will be lost to federal income tax. The greater your adjusted gross income, or “AGI,” the more likely a larger portion of your Social Security will be eaten up by federal income tax.

Traditional IRA distributions are included in AGI. This includes both voluntary as well as required minimum distributions, or “RMD’s.” Roth IRA distributions, on the other hand, typically aren’t included in AGI since they generally aren’t taxable provided that certain rules are followed regarding the timing of distributions. Assuming that you’ve obeyed the rules, you will reduce your AGI in future years when you would have otherwise taken taxable traditional IRA distributions had you not done your Roth IRA conversion.

While a reduction in AGI doesn’t necessarily translate to a reduction in taxation of Social Security benefits, as illustrated in Exhibit 1 of Part 2 of Say Goodbye to Up to 30% of Your Social Security Benefits, there’s a very good chance that this will happen unless the total of your AGI, tax-exempt income, and 50% of your Social Security benefits exceeds several hundred thousand dollars. Per Part 1 of that series, the loss of 30% of Social Security benefits to taxation won’t occur unless you’re in the top 35% tax bracket. In 2011, the 35% bracket isn’t an issue until taxable income, i.e., AGI less itemized deductions and personal exemptions, exceeds $379,150.

Although reduction in taxation of Social Security benefits won’t occur in every situation, it should nonetheless be included as part of most Roth IRA conversion analyses.

Categories
Income Tax Planning Social Security

Increase Your After-Tax Social Security Benefits – Part 4 of 4

Retirement Income Center

If you read Part 3 of this series last week, you should be familiar with my football analogy. Specifically, when it comes to winning the Social Security retirement benefit game once you start receiving benefits, you need to win two halves of the game: (1) reduce taxable benefits, and (2) reduce the tax attributable to your benefits. Parts 2 and 3 of this series discussed how to win the first half. Now that the halftime entertainment is over, we’re ready to start the second half.

In order to reduce the tax attributable to your Social Security retirement benefits, once you’ve employed appropriate strategies for reducing your taxable benefits, the focus should be on maximizing your itemized deductions – without increasing your exposure to alternative minimum tax (“AMT”). If the total amount of your itemized deductions is less than the standard deduction – game over. If you’re able to itemize your deductions, read on.

There are basically five categories of itemized deductions to pay attention to:

  1. Medical and dental expenses
  2. Taxes paid
  3. Interest paid
  4. Gifts to charity
  5. Job expenses and certain miscellaneous deductions

Here’s a brief overview of each category, two of which are only deductible if the total amount exceeds a specified percentage of adjusted gross income (“AGI”):

Medical and Dental Expenses

A deduction is allowed only for expenses paid primarily for the prevention or alleviation of a physical or mental defect or illness. You may only take a deduction for the amount of your total medical and dental expenses that exceeds 7.5% of your AGI.

Taxes Paid

Deductible taxes primarily include (1) the greater of state income taxes or general sales taxes, (2) real estate taxes, and (3) motor vehicle registration fees. You need to be careful about prepaying state income and real estate taxes at the end of the year to maximize these deductions since they can also increase your alternative minimum taxable income and your AMT liability.

Interest Paid

The most notable deduction in this area is home mortgage interest on first and second homes up to specified limits. Investment interest is also deductible to the extent of investment income.

Gifts to Charity

Charitable contributions made to qualified charitable organizations are deductible and include gifts made by cash or check as well as noncash contributions.

Job Expenses and Certain Miscellaneous Deductions

The most notable deduction in this area is unreimbursed employee expenses, including job travel, union dues, and job education. Other potential deductions include tax preparation and planning fees, investment management fees, and safe deposit box fees. You may only deduct the amount of your total job expenses and specified miscellaneous deductions that exceeds 2% of your AGI.

Based on my 25+ years of experience as a tax professional, including defending deductibility of itemized deductions on behalf of clients in IRS examinations, I can tell you unequivocally that consultation with a tax professional is crucial to maximizing, and defending, your itemized deductions – without increasing your exposure to AMT.

Assuming you’ve implemented strategies to reduce your taxable benefits and maximize your itemized deductions without increasing your exposure to AMT, you’ve won both halves of the game since you will have (1) reduced your marginal income tax rate, (2) reduced the income tax attributable to your taxable Social Security benefits, and (3) increased your after-tax Social Security benefits. Congratulations – let the celebration begin!

Categories
Income Tax Planning Social Security

Increase Your After-Tax Social Security Benefits – Part 3 of 4

Retirement Income Center

Since it’s Super Bowl Sunday as I write this post, let’s discuss strategy as it pertains to winning the Social Security benefit game. If you want to be successful at increasing your after-tax Social Security benefits, you need to have a winning strategy. Hopefully you read Part 1 of this post and if you’re not yet receiving benefits, you’ve begun to implement your pre-benefit receipt game plan.

Once you’ve begun receiving your retirement benefits, there are two halves to winning the game when it comes to increasing after-tax benefits: (1) reduce taxable benefits, and (2) reduce the tax attributable to your benefits. If you’ve read Parts 1 and 2 and/or the previous two-part Say Goodbye to Up to 30% of Your Social Security Benefits series, you know that reduction of taxable benefits is all about minimizing the three components of “combined income,” i.e., (1) 50% of Social Security benefits, (2) adjusted gross income, and (3) tax-exempt income. Components #1 and #3 were addressed in Part 2.

Let’s turn our attention to component #2 – adjusted gross income, or “AGI.” As defined in Retirement Income Visions‘ Glossary, “adjusted gross income” is equal to gross income from taxable sources less deductions from gross income that are allowable even if you don’t itemize deductions. To the extent that you’re able to (a) reduce your gross income from taxable sources and/or (b) increase your deductions from gross income, you will reduce the amount of your adjusted gross income and, in turn, reduce your “combined income.”

Reduce Gross Income From Taxable Sources

Even though you can reduce your taxable Social Security benefits by reducing your gross income, why would you want to do this? After all, don’t you want to maximize your salary, self-employment income, pension income, rental income, partnership income, interest and dividend income, capital gains, etc.? Absolutely — with a caveat. Your goal should always be to maximize cash flow while minimizing taxable income. For those of you who receive annual Schedule K-1’s from entities in which you are a partner, shareholder, or limited liability company member, you know that quite often there’s a difference between what shows up on your K-1 as taxable income vs. the cash distributions you receive.

How do you reduce your gross income when you’re receiving Social Security benefits without negatively impacting your cash flow? Here are six ways to do this:

  • For taxable investments, i.e., nonretirement accounts, invest in immediate and/or deferred income annuities since a portion (sometimes substantial) of the distributions will be nontaxable.
  • Sell assets with unrealized losses to offset capital gains recognized earlier in the year.
  • Minimize distributions in excess of required minimum distributions (“RMD’s”) from self-managed non-Roth IRA retirement plans.
  • Minimize taxable Roth IRA conversions.
  • If you have net rental income from your rental property(ies), transfer mortgage balances from your home to one or more of your rental properties to increase your rental property interest deduction up to the amount of your net rental income. Even though your overall mortgage interest deduction may be unchanged, you may be able to reduce your taxable Social Security benefits.
  • Look for opportunities to sell properties that have passive activity loss carry forwards in order to recognize the losses.

Increase Deductions From Gross Income

When we think of tax deductions, what comes to mind most often are “itemized deductions,” including mortgage interest, real estate taxes, charitable contributions, etc. While these types of deductions reduce taxable income, they don’t reduce adjusted gross income. Although the opportunities in this area are limited, and assuming you’re not paying alimony, here’s three possibilities:

  • If you’re less than 70-1/2, maximize your IRA deduction.
  • If you’re self-employed, maximize your self-employed pension plan, i.e., SEP-IRA deduction.
  • If you’re not eligible for Medicare, establish and maximize contributions to a health savings account (“HSA”).

By the time you read this post, Super Bowl Sunday will be a memory. If you’re receiving Social Security benefits, your game and associated battle to reduce the taxation of your benefits is ongoing. Do you have a winning strategy in place to maximize your after-tax Social Security benefits?

Categories
Income Tax Planning Social Security

Increase Your After-Tax Social Security Benefits – Part 2 of 4

Retirement Income Center

Given the fact that Social Security benefits are taxable when you exceed certain income thresholds, your financial professional(s) should design a Social Security plan for you that includes strategies for minimizing Social Security taxation and maximizing your after-tax Social Security benefits.

As pointed out in Part 1 of this post, there are two types of planning opportunities: (1) Pre-benefit receipt and (2) Ongoing benefit receipt. Part 1 discussed various pre-benefit receipt strategies, including mentioning the importance of analyzing and potentially implementing them beginning in one’s 40’s. Once you flip the Social Security switch and start receiving your benefits, while you generally won’t be able to control the amount or timing of your benefits, there are nonetheless opportunities available to reduce the amount of taxable benefits as well as the amount of tax attributable to your benefits that you ultimately pay. Strategies for reducing taxable benefits will be discussed in this post and Part 3. Part 4 will address reduction of income tax attributable to benefits.

Due to the fact that the thresholds are relatively low, reduction of taxable Social Security benefits can be challenging, to say the least. As shown in Exhibit 1 of the January 17, 2011 post, Say Goodbye to Up to 30% of Your Social Security Benefits – Part 2 of 2, assuming that your filing status is single, once your “combined income” exceeds approximately $49,000, 85% of your Social Security benefits will be taxable.

As discussed in the last three posts, there are three components of “combined income:” (1) 50% of Social Security benefits, (2) adjusted gross income, and (3) tax-exempt income. Components #1 and #3 will be addressed in this post, with adjusted gross income reserved for Part 3.

50% of Social Security Benefits

Unless the benefit start date has been deferred (see the five-part Do Your Homework Before Flipping the Social Security Switch series beginning on October 11, 2010 and the November 15, 2010 post, Wait Until 70 to Collect Social Security?) or the “file and suspend” strategy (see the December 13 and 20, 2010 posts, Breadwinner Approaching Social Security Retirement Age? – File and Suspend – Parts 1 and 2) has been employed in the case of a married couple to suspend the receipt of the breadwinner’s Social Security benefits, component #1, 50% of Social Security benefits, cannot be controlled once payment of benefits begins. Whatever amount of Social Security retirement benefits you and your spouse, if married, receive, 50% of the gross amount will be included in the calculation of “combined income.”

Tax-Exempt Income

Component #3, tax-exempt income, was discussed in Part 1 of this post. Since the calculation of taxable Social Security benefits is unfavorably impacted by tax-exempt income, while it may be beneficial to you for other reasons, inclusion of tax-exempt investments as part of your investment portfolio won’t be of much use to you when it comes to minimizing taxable Social Security benefits. While this factor generally isn’t considered by most investment professionals when designing an investment portfolio, it should be.

The third component of “combined income,” adjusted gross income, provides for the most opportunities for reducing “combined income” and, in turn, the greatest potential for reducing taxable Social Security benefits. Part 3 is devoted to a discussion of strategies for reducing adjusted gross income.

Categories
Annuities Income Tax Planning Retirement Income Planning Roth IRA Social Security

Increase Your After-Tax Social Security Benefits – Part 1 of 4

Retirement Income Center

The last two posts, Say Goodbye to Up to 30% of Your Social Security Benefits – Parts 1 and 2 discussed taxation of Social Security benefits. As explained in both posts, up to 50% or 85% of Social Security benefits can be taxable depending upon the amount of one’s “combined income” (50% of Social Security benefits plus adjusted gross income increased by tax-exempt income) compared to specified thresholds that are dependent upon one’s tax filing status (i.e., single, head of household, married filing separate, or married filing joint) and one’s tax rates.

Although, as pointed out in last week’s post, taxation of Social Security benefits has been a thorn in Congress’ side ever since it came into being in 1984, it appears that it’s here to stay. Income taxation of Social Security benefits can be reduced or, in some cases, eliminated, in one or more years with proper planning. While much of the planning is ongoing throughout the years that one is collecting benefits, there are several opportunities that should be analyzed and potentially implemented beginning in one’s 40’s, many years before the receipt of one’s first Social Security check. This post focuses on pre-benefit receipt planning and Parts 2, 3, and 4 address planning strategies during the Social Security benefit receipt years.

Before discussing strategies that can be implemented to reduce taxation of Social Security benefits, let me make clear one strategy that generally isn’t effective. Although it hasn’t been given as much attention the last several years in our low-interest rate environment, income tax and investment planning strategies often include an analysis of after-tax return returns from taxable vs. tax-exempt investments. As mentioned in the previous two posts as well as the beginning of this one, “combined income,” which is the starting point for calculating taxable Social Security benefits, is increased by tax-exempt income. As a result, assuming that your goal is to reduce taxable Social Security benefits, other than the fact that the amount of income from a tax-exempt investment is generally less than the income from a similar taxable investment, inclusion of tax-exempt investments as part of your investment portfolio won’t be of much benefit to you.

Perhaps one of the greatest opportunities for reducing taxable Social Security benefits and ongoing associated taxation of same that can be implemented beginning 20 or more years before the receipt of one’s first Social Security check is a Roth IRA conversion or series of conversions over several years. This strategy was featured in the March 15, 2010 post, Want to Reduce Taxable Social Security Benefits? Consider a Roth IRA Conversion as part of Retirement Income Visions™ extensive Roth IRA conversion series.

As discussed in that post, to the extent that a Roth IRA conversion reduces the amount remaining in your traditional IRA, your required minimum distributions (“RMD’s”) that you must take from your traditional IRA’s beginning when you turn 70-1/2 will be reduced. Reduced RMD’s result in less “combined income” which can reduce the amount of taxable Social Security benefits and can also reduce the marginal tax rate that is applied to the taxable portion of your benefits, resulting in less taxes. It’s important to keep in mind that this strategy, in order to be effective, needs to be implemented before receipt of Social Security benefits. To the extent that it is executed while one is receiving benefits, it will generally increase taxable income and taxation of benefits.

Another strategy than can be implemented well before receipt of Social Security is investment in one or more non-qualified (i.e., not within an IRA or other retirement plan) deferred income annuities, or “DIAs”. For an introduction to this powerful retirement income planning investment strategy, please refer to the November 23, 2009 post, Deferred Income Annuities: The Sizzle in a Retirement Income Plan. When structured as a nonqualified annuity, there are two potential ways that DIAs can be used to reduce taxation of Social Security benefits. First, the payout start and end dates from one or more DIAs can be selected to plan for the amount of income that will be paid out to reduce taxation of Social Security benefits. Secondly, a portion, sometimes very sizeable, of DIA payouts from nonqualified investments are tax-favored since they aren’t subject to income taxation by virtue of an “exclusion ratio.” Furthermore, unlike tax-exempt investment income, the portion that is excluded isn’t added back to “combined income” when calculating taxable Social Security benefits.

Permanent life insurance is another strategy that can be implemented many years before receipt of Social Security retirement benefits to reduce taxation of those benefits. To the extent that there is build-up of cash value within whole life, universal life, or variable universal life insurance policies, this cash value, when not subject to modified endowment contract, or “MEC,” taxation rules, can be distributed either through loans and/or withdrawals during one’s retirement years, often with little or no associated income taxation. To the extent that this is achieved, this will favorably affect taxation of Social Security benefits.

When you get into your later 50’s and get closer to the earliest potential start date for receipt of your Social Security benefits, i.e., age 62, a key Social Security tax-reduction strategy that has been discussed extensively in several of the Social Security posts beginning with the October 4, 2010 post, Plan for the Frays in Your Social Security Blanket – Part 2 of 2, is the choice of benefit start date for you and your spouse if married. While a delay in start date can result in increased total benefits received during one’s lifetime, it will also result in delay of taxation of benefits as well as potential increased after-tax benefits once commencement of benefits occurs.

Categories
Income Tax Planning Social Security

Say Goodbye to Up to 30% of Your Social Security Benefits – Part 2 of 2

Retirement Income Center

Taxation of Social Security benefits has been a thorn in Congress’ side ever since it came into being in 1984. As aptly stated by one of Retirement Income Visions’™ readers after reading Part 1, it’s a tax on a tax. After having one’s earnings, up to a maximum limit, reduced by a payroll tax of 6.2% for all of one’s working life, it’s difficult for Social Security recipients to stomach the fact that their benefits may be reduced by yet another tax — income tax.

Per last week’s post, since 1984, up to 50% of Social Security benefits became subject to income tax, with this percentage increasing to 85% beginning in 1994. Although the “combined income” (50% of Social Security benefits plus adjusted gross income increased by tax-exempt income) thresholds are relatively low for having up to 85% of one’s benefits subject to tax (i.e., greater than $34,000 if you use single, head of household, or married filing separate filing status and over $44,000 for married filing joint status), and, furthermore, haven’t ever been increased for inflation, you will never forfeit 85% of your benefits.

As explained last week, the maximum percentage of your Social Security benefits that you will lose to federal income tax is 29.75%. Furthermore, this will only occur if your “combined income” is several hundred thousand dollars. Even if up to 85% of your Social Security benefits are subject to taxation, it’s possible that you may only lose 5% of your benefits to income tax if your combined income is low.

To demonstrate this and to help you better understand the taxation of Social Security benefits, I have prepared Exhibit 1. This exhibit includes nine different scenarios for nine hypothetical people who receive Social Security income of $20,000, other income ranging from $15,000 to $270,000 depending upon the scenario, uses single filing status, and claims one exemption and the standard deduction.

“Combined income” is calculated in each scenario, which is equal to 50% of Social Security benefits, or $10,000 (50% x $20,000), plus adjusted gross income increased by tax-exempt income. Since single filing status is being used, the maximum taxable Social Security benefits percentage will be as follows:

Combined Income

Maximum Taxable Percentage
Less Than $25,000

0%
$25,000 – $34,000

50%
$34,001+

85%

It’s important to note that the maximum taxable percentages per the above table are exactly that – maximum percentages. As examples of this:

  1. Even though the maximum taxable Social Security benefits percentage is 50% in scenario #2, only $3,000, or 15% ($3,000 divided by $20,000), is taxable.
  2. Even though combined income exceeds $34,000 beginning with Scenario #3, it isn’t until Scenario #5 when combined income is equal to $48,706, that 85% of Social Security benefits of $20,000, or $17,000, is taxable.

After calculating the amount of combined income and taxable Social Security benefits, each scenario shows the amount of federal income tax including and excluding the taxable Social Security benefits. The difference between these two amounts is the tax that is attributable to the taxable Social Security benefits. The amount of tax that is attributable to the taxable Social Security benefits is then subtracted from the Social Security benefits of $20,000 to arrive at “Social Security Benefits Net of Federal Income Tax,” or net Social Security benefits. This is the amount of Social Security that the hypothetical person in each scenario gets to keep after paying the income tax that is attributable to the taxable portion of his/her benefits.

As a final step, the “Social Security Benefits Net of Federal Income Tax” is divided by the Social Security benefits of $20,000 in each scenario to determine the percentage of Social Security benefits that is retained after paying the tax that is attributable to the taxable portion of benefits. Based on the maximum taxable Social Security benefits percentage, the percentage of benefits retained is greater than what one might envision before running the calculations. As examples of this:

  1. 97.8% of benefits are retained in scenario #2 even though the maximum taxable Social Security benefits percentage is 50%.
  2. 94.7% and 90.3% of benefits is retained in scenario #3 and #4, respectively, even though the maximum taxable Social Security benefits percentage is 85%.
  3. Approximately 75% to 80% of benefits are retained in scenarios #5 through #8 even though the maximum taxable Social Security benefits percentage is 85%.

It isn’t until we get to scenario #9 where we get close to the maximum percentage of Social Security benefits that you can lose to income tax, i.e., 29.75%. It is in this scenario with combined income of $280,000 that 28% of Social Security benefits are lost to federal income tax and 72% is retained.

While it seems unfair to most Social Security recipients that their retirement benefits are subject to taxation, hopefully it’s somewhat comforting to know that the percentage of benefits lost to income taxation in most cases isn’t as high as one might have thought before reading this post.

Categories
Income Tax Planning Social Security

Say Goodbye to Up to 30% of Your Social Security Benefits – Part 1 of 2

Retirement Income Center

Retirement Income Visions™ began a series of posts on the topic of Social Security on September 27th, focusing on various little-known strategies for maximizing Social Security benefits. In addition to the strategies not receiving a lot of publicity, when they are discussed, income taxation is often overlooked. Given the fact that a large portion of Social Security benefits can be subject to income tax, maximization of after-tax Social Security benefits should be your goal with each strategy.

Prior to 1984, Social Security benefits were nontaxable. Beginning in 1984, up to 50% of Social Security benefits became subject to taxation. The percentage was increased from 50% to up to 85% beginning in 1994. Since 1994, up to 85% of Social Security benefits are taxable, depending upon the total of two individual calculations: (1) 50% of Social Security benefits plus (2) adjusted gross income increased by tax-exempt income. While tax-exempt income generally isn’t taxable, it comes into play when calculating the taxable amount of one’s Social Security benefits. Whenever the total of these two amounts, otherwise referred to as “combined income,” exceeds a specified threshold, a portion of Social Security benefits is taxable.

The amount of the threshold is dependent upon your tax filing status. If your status is single, head of household, or married filing separate, the threshold is $25,000. If, on the other hand, your status is married filing joint, then your threshold is $32,000. The greater the excess of “combined income” over the specified threshold, the greater the amount of taxable Social Security benefits.

The $25,000 and $32,000 thresholds are the floor amounts for calculating taxable Social Security benefits. Up to 50% of Social Security benefits are taxable if your combined income is between $25,000 and $34,000 if you use single, head of household, or married filing separate filing status. The combined income level for married filing joint status for taxation of up to 50% of Social Security benefits is between $32,000 and $44,000. Once the upper limits of these respective thresholds are exceeded, up to 85% of Social Security benefits are taxable.

So, if up to 85% of Social Security benefits are taxable, why is the title of this post, Say Goodbye to Up to 30% of Your Social Security Benefits? As with taxation of all income, the amount of income tax that you pay is dependent upon the amount of your taxable income. Taxable income is calculated by subtracting itemized deductions or the standard deduction and personal exemptions from adjusted gross income. Once you determine your taxable income, income tax rates are applied to specified ranges of taxable income that are dependent upon your tax filing status. Federal income tax rates currently range from a low of 15% to a high of 35%.

Assuming that your situation is such that 85% of your Social Security benefits are taxable and assuming that you’re in the top tax bracket of 35%, then you will lose 29.75% (85% x 35%), or approximately 30%, of your Social Security benefits to federal income tax. Conversely, you will retain 70.25% (100% – 29.75%), or approximately 70%, of your benefits after paying the income tax attributable to them.

In an effort to help you better understand taxation of Social Security benefits, next week’s post will include calculations of taxable Social Security benefits, federal income tax attributable to taxable benefits, and Social Security benefits net of federal income tax for various income levels. All of you analyticals will love this one!

Categories
Social Security

Do Your Homework Before Flipping the Social Security Switch – Part 3 of 5

Retirement Income Center

Income Tax Attributable to Social Security Benefits

In Part 1 of this series, we learned that the penalty for flipping the Social Security switch at age 62 instead of at full retirement age (“FRA”) is anywhere from a 20.83% to 30% reduction of benefits otherwise payable beginning at FRA depending upon one’s year of birth.

An example was used in Part 2 whereby an individual born between 1943 and 1954 who was entitled to receive a monthly benefit of $2,000 beginning at age 66 instead received $500, or 25% less per month, or $1,500 as a result of commencement of payments at age 62. The amount of the benefit was reduced by an additional $250 per month to $1,250 as a result of the individual receiving earnings in excess of the current specified annual limit of $14,160.

Up until now, we’ve been looking at the benefit reduction administered by Social Security Administration, or SSA. Depending upon the amount of your Social Security benefits, other income, and tax filing status (e.g., individual, joint, or married filing separate), your already reduced benefit may be further slashed by federal, and potentially state, income taxes. Most states, including California where I live, don’t tax Social Security benefits, however, there are currently 17 states where this isn’t the case. The remainder of this post will address federal income taxation of Social Security benefits.

Taxation of Social Security benefits is dependent on the amount of one’s “combined income” in excess of specified limits that varies depending upon tax filing status. “Combined income” is equal to the sum of the following three components:

Adjusted Gross Income (“AGI”) + Nontaxable Interest + ½ of Social Security Benefits

If your filing status is “individual,” up to 50% of your benefits will be taxable if your “combined income” is between $25,000 and $34,000. The percentage increases up to 85% for “combined income” in excess of $34,000.

If your filing status is “joint,” up to 50% of your benefits will be taxable if your “combined income” is between $32,000 and $44,000. The percentage increases up to 85% for “combined income” in excess of $44,000.

Continuing with our example from Part 2 using employment income of $20,160, let’s also assume Social Security of $15,000 ($1,250 per month x 12 months). Let’s further assume “joint” filing status with the spouse receiving pension income of $20,000 and use of the standard deduction. “Combined income” would be $63,660 (employment income of $20,160 + pension income of $36,000 + ½ of Social Security benefits of $15,000). Since “combined income” is $63,660, 85% of Social Security benefits will be taxable. Federal income tax, assuming no Social Security, would be $3,982. This increases to $5,894 after including the taxable portion of Social Security benefits, resulting in federal income tax of $1,912 attributable to Social Security income. The income tax hit could be greater if our couple happened to live in one of the 17 states that tax Social Security benefits.

After taking into consideration the benefit reductions attributable to commencement of benefits at age 62, receipt of employment income, and income tax attributable to Social Security benefits, the annual Social Security benefit of $24,000 receivable beginning at age 66 is reduced by $10,912, to $13,088 at age 62 per Exhibit 1.

The benefit receivable at age 62 of $13,088 represents a reduction of 45.5%, or receipt of 54.5% of benefits of $24,000 otherwise payable had the individual in our example waited until age 66 to begin receiving Social Security. While the work-related portion of the benefit reduction would end and can potentially be recouped (see Part II of this series) beginning at age 66, and while it’s possible that income tax attributable to Social Security benefits may continue at age 66, additional analysis would need to be done to determine if a four-year annual benefit reduction of approximately $11,000 and a continued lifetime benefit reduction of $6,000 thereafter justifies flipping the Social Security switch at age 62.

Part 4 will discuss how the decision to begin receiving Social Security benefits prior to full retirement age may affect the amount of your spouse’s benefit.

Categories
Roth IRA

Considering a Partial 72(t) Roth IRA Conversion? – Tread Lightly

Retirement Income Center

The topic of this week’s blog post is one which, quite frankly, doesn’t pertain to very many people. You may be wondering why I’m writing about it if this is the case. Besides bringing the topic to the attention of those who may be affected by it, the main reason I’m writing this post is to provide interested readers with an example of a tax planning strategy that, while it doesn’t run afoul of any IRS rules, hasn’t been officially blessed by IRS.

As with many of my blog posts, this one was inspired by one of my clients. Mr. and Mrs. R., who are retired, aren’t yet receiving Social Security benefits, and derive the majority of their income from Mrs. R.’s 72(t) IRA and two nonqualified term certain annuities, a sizeable portion of which is nontaxable.

For those of you unfamiliar with a 72(t) IRA, some brief background. Generally you must wait until age 59-1/2 to begin taking distributions from an IRA, otherwise you’re subject to a 10% premature distribution penalty in addition to any income tax liability on your distributions. IRS has carved out an exception to this rule whereby you won’t be subject to the 10% penalty if you receive a series of substantially equal periodic payments, or “SOSEPP,” from your IRA for the greater of five years or until you reach 59-1/2. A 72(t) IRA account is a traditional or a Roth IRA account from which a SOSEPP is being made.

While Mrs. R has been taking her SOSEPP for five years, she’s still about a year and a half from turning 59-1/2. If Mrs. R. discontinues her SOSEPP before she turns 59-1/2, IRS would consider this to be a modification of her SOSEPP. As such, Mrs. R. would be subject to a 10% premature distribution penalty on future distributions from her IRA. Furthermore, the 10% penalty would also be applied retroactively to all of the distributions she has already taken from her 72(t) IRA.

In addition to their 72(t) IRA and nonqualified annuity distributions, my clients recently sold a rental property at a loss of $26,000. After reducing their adjusted gross income by various itemized deductions, they were projected to have a 2010 taxable loss of approximately $25,000. While this would result in no income tax liability, without further income tax planning, this would be a potentially wasted opportunity to recognize additional income and still pay no income taxes.

How could my clients recognize additional income? While they could potentially sell securities at a gain in their nonretirement account, this would be offset by a sizeable capital loss carryover. The other option was to do a Roth IRA conversion of Mrs. R.’s 72(t) IRA. IRS regulations permit a full Roth IRA conversion of a 72(t) IRA provided that the IRA owner continues his/her 72(t) distributions from the Roth IRA account following conversion.

Since the value of Mrs. R’s. 72(t) IRA was approximately $280,000, the potential income tax liability attributable to a full 2010 conversion of Mrs. R.’s 72(t) IRA to a Roth IRA couldn’t be justified based on my client’s current and projected multi-year income tax planning even with splitting the reporting of Mrs. R.’s conversion income between 2011 and 2012. I calculated that Mrs. R. could do a partial conversion of $50,000 without incurring any income tax liability due to my client’s ability to use a net operating loss carryover that they couldn’t otherwise use in 2010. Furthermore, Mrs. R.’s conversion amount could be as much as $70,000 before my client’s marginal income tax rate would exceed 15%.

Since IRS has endorsed the full conversion of a 72(t) IRA to a Roth IRA, it would seem that there should be no issue with a partial conversion so long as the 72(t) payments continue following the conversion. Logically, the post-conversion 72(t) payment amount should be paid from both the original 72(t) IRA and the new Roth IRA accounts based on the allocation of the relative values of the two accounts. The problem is that IRS has provided no guidance on partial Roth IRA conversions of 72(t) IRA accounts, including the allocation of post-conversion 72(t) payment amounts.

Given this situation, while it isn’t logical, IRS could potentially challenge a partial Roth IRA conversion of a 72(t) IRA. If IRS were to prevail on this issue, as previously stated, future, as well as retroactive, 72(t) distributions would be assessed a 10% premature distribution penalty. IRS would also assess interest on any assessed penalties.

After consulting with Natalie Choate, a well-known attorney who specializes in estate planning for retirement benefits, I recommended to my clients that they consider doing a partial Roth IRA conversion of Mrs. R.’s 72(t) IRA in 2010, file a 2010 income tax extension application, and plan on recharacterizing, or undoing, Mrs. R.’s partial Roth IRA conversion by October 15, 2011, the extended due date of Mr. and Mrs. R.’s 2010 income tax returns, in the event that IRS doesn’t provide definitive guidance on partial Roth IRA conversions of 72(t) IRA’s by this date. (For an explanation of the recharacterization process, please see Recharacterization – Your Roth IRA Conversion Insurance Policy.)