Tax planning-questions

I have been researching my personal income taxes. What I had in 2007, what I will have in 2008, and some go forward issues.

Some questions and comments

2007 AGI 103k taxable income 63k federal tax owed $8700 8.4% effective tax Ohio state tax owed $3800

**net- refund of $3000+ federal and owed state ~$300** For last 3 years we get a larger federal refund each year and owe state more and more each year. We have adjusted state withholdings each year and it doesn't seem to work. Meaning we owe $120, so we withhold $10 per month and next year we owe $240, so then we withhold $20 per month extra and next year we still owe more than the $240 the previous year.

2008- will add 2 dependants (kids) income will drop slightly (one year thing- wife was on disability for about 16 weeks). The raises we receive might offset this, not sure yet. In June of 2008 wife adjusted withholdings so she has less federal tax withheld and take home was increased. In 2009 this should result in 0 federal refund.

Issue- I cannot find Ohio tax tables which look like the ones on fairmark. First two pages of google search found nothing like these:

formatting link
found one site which would allow be to build my own spreadsheet forthe tables, but I am not sure if the information on the site iscurrent or accurate. Anyone know of a good reference which shows state tax tables like fairmark?

Second issue- taxable income is in 15% tax bracket (63k). 401ks are NOT maxed. Roths ARE maxed. 40k of deductions coming from mortgage and property taxes, plus some unreimbursed business expenses. Would it make sense to not put money in 401k and leave extra investment dollars in taxable accounts because paying 15% now is better than paying 25% or more in retirement? Fine line because if I reduce 401k contribution percentage for taxable accounts, I risk being put in 25% bracket.

**aside- 20% of gross pay is set aside for retirement in Roths or 401ks, the question is maybe taxable accounts are better than 401k provided we stay in 15% bracket**

Third- I am considering some 529 plans which give state tax deductions but no federal tax deductions. Would the state tax deduction in any affect my federal tax liability?

From a tax standpoint, is there an advantage to moving 401k

contributions to a 529 contribution to gain a deduction? I don't think so (money would be taxed at federal level), but thought I would ask.

Any comments welcome. Thank you.

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
jIM
Loading thread data ...

formatting link
has some of theinformation.

There is a liability advantage to having your assets in retirement accounts.

By moving your funds to a 401k, you can avoid state taxation by moving to a low income tax state.

You will want to convert your 401k funds to Roth eventually.

-- Ron

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
Ron Peterson

Your governor suggested a 4.2% overall decrease from 2007 to 2008.

Given the minor changes in Federal, the slight increase in exemptions, and bracket changes, why not just use the 2007 turbotax to start your forcasting?

I agree your goal should be to top the 15% bracket, then go Roth. Getting it dead on is tough, but within $1000 is a worthy goal.

Joe

formatting link

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
joetaxpayer

"jIM" wrote

What are the matching terms, if any, on the 401(k)?

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
Elle

Both 401ks at least meet the match.

My match is 66% of first 6% I think (might be 50% of first 6%). I contribute 11%. Wifes match is 100% of first 4% and 50% of next 2% I think. She contributes 6%.

Both Roths are maxed Have EF of 12k (3 months expenses) have additional taxable investments of 1k in PRPFX, looking to increase this to 12k within 2 years as secondary EF.

age 35/34 ~200k in retirement accounts.

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
jIM

"jIM" wrote Re future tax rates and contributing only up to 401(k) matching--

Then for at least this year, to me it makes sense to consider contributing only up to the matches and saving the rest in taxable accounts. Thus you would pay tax at the 15% rate on most of your income. If you hit the 25% bracket due to putting less in your 401(k), then remember it is only the dollars over the 15% bracket that are taxed at the 25% rate. Specifically, at most, around $5000 would not go into your

401(k) this year, upping your federal AGI to around $68k. For 2008, the federal MFJ 25% rate applies to the excess over $65,100. So at most, around $3k will get taxed at 25%. You would be paying maybe an extra $300 (= (25%-15%)*3000) on federal this year due to just crossing over into 25% territory. The state tax is not much.

having problems with AMT.

Naturally aim for more tax efficient vehicles for the taxable retirement savings. Yahoo suggests PRPFX has a 37% or so turnover, so it is not what I would call tax efficient. Remember the special treatment long term capital gains and qualified dividends get for 2008 (and 2009, knock on wood)

Assumption: I personally think tax rates will be quite a bit higher by the time you retire.

You are a regular here with plenty of insight yourself, so I imagine you are aware of these notions and are merely doing a double check on your analysis with other MIFP etc. folks.

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
Elle

I think that you need more taxable investments to serve as a secondary EF.

Do you have any home equity? If not, are you considering buying a home?

That's good.

-- Ron

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
Ron Peterson

Definitely a 2 year goal is to increase this. I'd prefer to invest more aggressively for now and slowly build up the EF.

Bought a 352k home at height of bubble and own about 10% of that right now. I doubt house would sell for 352k now.

thx

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
jIM

Not sure what would trigget AMT- there was a thread here at tax time, started by me, which some suggested I am approaching AMT territory.

PRPFX is the most tax efficient balanced fund I can find- do you have a better suggestion for funds with a 3-10 year time horizon (new cars, house improvements, large vacations). This fund is where we park money for intermediate term expenses and use as a backup EF. I expect PRPFX to beat cash return each year... and I think it does that.

I see 37% turnover- that is relatively low to me. Maybe an index fund is lower, but considering what PRPFX holds, I consider it highly tax efficient. Gold and Silver do not pay dividends.

Yield is 0.42% last dividend was $.34 per share (on a NAV of 35.86).

Based on prospectus it is managed to be tax efficient (and I pay a premium for that management- fund is more expensive than I prefer).

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
jIM

"jIM" wrote On fund choices for a taxable account

I am afraid I cannot comment meaningfully, since investing in a stock mutual fund for the short term (such as 3-10 years) is not one that makes sense to me. I would not know how to weigh the pros and cons of PRPFX vs. like funds in this instance. No disrespect intended.

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
Elle

I meant that the secondary EF could have stocks or ETFs which would mean a more aggressive investment.

-- Ron

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
Ron Peterson

Since you have something like 30 years to retirement, you would have to be extremely tax efficient to beat the 401(k) with a taxable account. More efficient than paying today's favorable long-term capital gains tax rate even just once. This depends on a lot of factors like the length of time of investment, projected annual returns, projected tax rates, and account fees, but the time period I think you're looking at really favors the tax advantaged accounts.

-Will

william dot trice at ngc dot com

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
Will Trice

If I said retirement at age 53 is the goal (18 years away) would that change the comment?

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
jIM

53 opens up a couple issues: To take withdrawals from one's 401(k) and not pay penalty, you need to separate from your employer at 55. Otherwise, it's 59-1/2 unless you elect sec72(t). This points to having some Roth money or non-retirement account funds to bridge that gap.

Joe

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
joetaxpayer

Several points on this-

Both spouses work. I make more than wife, but she will have higher earning potential than me. She does not intend to retire in 18 years.

If mortgage is paid off in 18 years, the need for my paycheck drops considerably (my paycheck covers mortgage, both Roths, and about $400/ month towards utilitities).

We have some car debt retiring in 2009 and 2010, when that happens I could realistically see my paycheck being 2/3 savings and 1/3 mortgage.

Suggestions on what to "plan" for? I have been advised long range tax planning is not a good idea. Meaning paying 15% tax now and using taxable accounts not wise because the tax rates on dividends and capital gains change as often as politicians need them to change.

That being said, I have also been advised that 72t provisions and rules change almost as often. Is 72t a reliable rule to plan with?

I think I could get by on 20k per year from age 53 to age ~66 (when wife would retire)- meaning if I had 250k in cash, I think I could make it last- my expenses would not be high- I just don't like working.

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
jIM

Assuming a 72(t) solution to get your money out exists (see my reply to Joe), and just looking at after-tax return (i.e. ignoring your needs for an emergency fund or whatever), 18 years makes it easier, but not easy, to be tax efficient enough to beat a 401(k). Your efficiency would have still have to be pretty darn good, but it might be doable. But you'd have to remember that you won't drain your entire account immediately upon retirement, so some of it will be in your accounts for 30 years. So some tax allocation would be in order (i.e. maybe put some in taxable accounts and the rest in tax-advantaged accounts).

-Will

william dot trice at ngc dot com

-------------------------------------- Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the Newsgroup.

Reply to
Will Trice

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.