scheme to increase Roth IRA contribution for 2008

Dec 12, 2008 23 Replies

Sec. 408(d)(4):

(4) Contributions returned before due date of return Paragraph (1) does not apply to the distribution of any contribution paid during a taxable year to an individual retirement account or for an individual retirement annuity if - (A) such distribution is received on or before the day prescribed by law (including extensions of time) for filing such individual's return for such taxable year, (B) no deduction is allowed under section 219 with respect to such contribution, and (C) such distribution is accompanied by the amount of net income attributable to such contribution.

Notice 2000-39 stated the earnings could be negative and that was embodied in the final regs (TD 9056, published 5/2/03).

These final regulations retain, without change, the methods provided in the proposed regulations. Thus, under these final regulations, for purposes of returned contributions under section

408(d)(4) and recharacterized contributions under section 408A(d)(6), the net income attributable to a contribution is determined by allocating to the contribution a pro-rata portion of the net income on the assets in the IRA (whether positive or negative) during the period the IRA held the contribution. This new method is represented by the following formula: Net Income = Contribution x (Adjusted Closing Balance - Adjusted Opening Balance)

Use the formula in my posting, this one is missing the denominator, just a typo I'm sure.

-Mark Bole

A poor cut & paste from the regs.

Really ? It seems like putting as much after-tax money into a Roth as possible is a no-brainer. We're not talking Roth *conversion* here, where there is a trade-off between paying taxes now and paying 'em later.

I've already tax-loss harvested WAY more than enough to offset my gains (not much this year !), CGDs, $3K of ordinary income, and plenty of carry-forward. So that potential $2K cap-loss missed means nothing to me.

But I guess I see your point. If you have gains, having 'em tax-free within your Roth is a good thing; if you have losses, having inside the Roth is a negative. But we're taking long-term, and I don't think anyone seriously thinks a Roth will have net long-term losses; if you do, maybe just forget all this discussion and put your money in the mattress !

Yes, this is a very good point, and I think I'll probably drop the whole idea because of it (and the risk of being out of the market).

Thanks for the great discussion ...

John

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required