Comingling pre/post-tax contributions in IRA

I know I need to study IRS Pub 590, but I am hoping some kind soul will offer some educated insights .... As I recall, it is best to avoid comingling pre- and post-tax contributions in IRAs. I think it simplifies things when determining the tax on distributions. Is that right? Or does the IRS require that you prorate the taxability of distributions across all IRAs, independent of the ratio of pre-tax and post-tax contributions in each IRA that funds were actually distributed from? Assuming that I am correct about perferring to keep pre- and post-tax contributions in separate IRAs, is there anything I can to correct the situation if I inadvertently comingled them? I am talking about effecting a correction, if possible, within a few days after I pushed the button to consolidate the separate IRAs. (I forgot why I was keeping them separate in the first place, and I decided to consolidate two IRAs that I have at one brokerage firm.) If I simply create a new IRA and fund it with the amount of the post-tax IRA before consolidation, would that be sufficient. It is not clear to me how the IRS, decades later, know how much of an IRA was funded with pre-tax contributions and how much with post-tax contributions. But if it matters, the pre-tax IRA, which now includes some post-tax contribution and its earnings, was designated as a Rollover IRA when the account was opened. (I'm not sure that designation has stuck with the account since then. I need to check records.)

> > > > > > > > >
Reply to
nomail1983
Loading thread data ...

No.

That's correct.

What you may be thinking of is that you shouldn't comingle rollover and contributory IRAs, because the rollover IRA can be rolled into another employer plan later (although there are few reasons why one would want to do so -- the only one I can think of is so that you can then take a loan from the employer plan).

-- Barry Margolin, snipped-for-privacy@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA

*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***

Reply to
Barry Margolin

Possibly, but as long as you maintain accurate records and file your 8606 form whenever you make a post-tax (nondeductible) contribution, it should not be a problem.

Correct

If you haven't read Pub 590 you may not be aware of a fundamental truth about IRA accounts: No matter how many individual accounts, brokers, etc that you use, the IRS considers ALL these subaccounts to be part of a SINGLE IRA account. Whether you physically separate your pre- and post-tax contributions is irrelevant, each withdrawal is effectively taxed as prorated amounts of each in all your subaccounts. This is true regardless of which account you tap for the withdrawal. As I stated above, form 8606 is the route that you use to track the taxability of such withdrawals.

See above.

Reply to
Herb Smith

Yes. See the instructions for form 8606.

-- Don EA in Upstate NY

Reply to
Don Priebe

after tax (nondeductible) contributions have to be reported (by you) on Form 8606 for the year they apply. Otherwise you pay tax twice on that money. When you take money out, you use Form 8606 to determine the amount that is taxable--you will be asked for the value of ALL your traditional IRA's at the end of the year to calculate the percentage that is taxable. A Roth IRA is different, with distributions considered in order of contributions, conversions, and earnings. Other than keeping things simple, I don't see a drawback from commingled funds.

Reply to
Brew1

No. See below.

The value of all IRAs are aggregated to determine the taxable amount. It doesn't matter which account you draw the money from. If you think about it, post-tax treatment in IRAs applies only to the contributions. The earnings are always tax-deferred, so even an IRA with only pre-tax contributions would have a mixture of taxable and tax-free distributions. But since the law requires you to aggregate all balances it doesn't matter.

The IRS knows because you need to tell them. Form 8606 is used to keep track of your basis in the IRA. You file this every year in which non-deductable contributions are made, and then each year in which you take distributions, because the ratio will change due to investment returns in the IRA. It was once advisable to keep roll-over and non-roll-over accounts separate, but that is no longer necessary.

Reply to
Tom Russ

There is no need to keep separate accounts, as the IRS makes you add up the total of all your IRAs and calculate a percentage non-taxable based on your non-deductible contributions over the years. The IRS bases the calculations on the Form 8606 that you filed each year you had a non-deductible contribution to an IRA.

Reply to
bono9763

Is that really true? I thought it's still valid: The reason you want to segregate rollover funds is so that you can roll them back into a 401k if you so desire.

Reply to
NoSuchPerson

I thought that if you rolled a 401K into an IRA, you had the option to roll that back into a different 401K plan from a different employer at some time in the future, but if the rollover IRA was commingled with money from a different source (other than the rollover 401K) then you lost that option. Did something change this?

--

-Ernie-

Reply to
Ernie Klein

Unless you might have to file for bankruptcy.

In which case an uncorrupted IRA resulting only from a rollover from a qualified employer plan has unlimited protection, while other IRAs have $1 million protection in bankruptcy.

-- ArtKamlet at a o l dot c o m Columbus OH K2PZH

Reply to
Arthur Kamlet

Yes, it's been changed and that is no longer the case.

*However*, because a 401(k) plan is blown if non-ded trad IRA contributions get rolled into it, many 401(k) custodians still won't accept rollovers from commingled IRAs, even though tax law permits it.

-- Rich Carreiro snipped-for-privacy@rlcarr.com

Reply to
Rich Carreiro

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.