« Previous · Tax Update Blog Home · Next »
One of the factors in deciding whether to use the new "Roth" 401(k)s that become available January 1 is whether your tax rate at retirement might lower than it is now. A new report by the Congressional Budget Office makes a sobering case that tax rates are going nowhere but up over the long term:
Driven by rising health care costs and an aging population, federal spending for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will claim a sharply increasing share of the nation’s economic output over the coming decades.
Even if taxation reached levels that were unprecedented in the United States, current spending policies could become financially unsustainable. An evergrowing burden of federal debt held by the public would have a corrosive and potentially contractionary effect on the economy.
As the U.S. tax system is now configured, federal revenues will grow faster than the overall economy. Under current law, taxpayers will face higher rates, with detrimental consequences for work, saving, and economic growth.
If taxation is restricted to the levels that prevailed in the past, the growth of spending on programs for the elderly will have to be reduced substantially. Limiting the growth of outlays for defense, education, transportation, and other discretionary programs would not be enough to ensure fiscal sustainability.
Likewise, economic growth alone is unlikely to bring the nation’s long-term fiscal position into balance. Moreover, issuing ever-larger amounts of debt or dramatically raising tax rates could significantly reduce economic growth.
In a "Roth" 401(k) plan, you don't get a current tax break for deferring part of your salary; instead, if you meet certain conditions, withdrawals from the plan are tax-free forever. This is different from conventional 401(k) deferrals, which are excluded from taxable income currently but are taxable on withdrawal. If your tax rate will be lower at retirement, Roth 401(k)s aren't as attractive.
There are many factors besides tax rates to consider in evaluating a Roth 401(k); this article covers them well.
Hat tip: Tax Policy Blog, which has some eye-opening charts to illustrate the dilemma.
Bookmark: del.icio.us • Digg • reddit
The items included in the Tax Update Blog are informational only and are not meant as tax advice. Consult with your tax advisor to determine how any item applies to your situation.
Joe Kristan writes the Tax Update items, and any opinions expressed or implied are not neccesarily shared by anyone else at Roth & Company, P.C. Address questions or comments on Tax Updates to
Comments
Now, what are the chances that, 50 years from now we'll hear the following: "These RICH people SHELTERED all this ill gotten WEALTH in these TAX LOOPHOLE "Roth" accounts and now I (an envious, lazy bastard) have to pay an 85% marginal rate because SSI and Medicare have gone into the crapper and what little is left is going right back to these RICH retirees who SHELTERED their wealth 20 years ago. It's not FAIR. We need to reinstitute a tax on these amounts. Its for the CHEEELDRUN!"?
That's my concern. I'll get taxed now and later rather than just later and I'm one of the young, relatively high wage earners that would benefit most from this. Can I mitigate the risk by investing in high yield munibond funds througn my Roth 401k?
Posted by: Chad | December 20, 2005 4:16 PM
Chad? You don't trust the government to keep its promises? You've been paying attention or something.
I don't think the Roth IRA is entirely faith-based, though. I haven't done actual research on this, but I believe that the S&L cases, where the thrifts successfully sued the government for lost deductions when Congress changed the rules mid-game, might give Roth 401(k) participants a hammer in case Congress tries to pull a fast one. I wonder if anybody has studied this.
Posted by: Joe Kristan | December 20, 2005 6:01 PM
It would make a good scholarly article for a tax/law journal. I hadn't thought of that S&L connection. Why don't you draft something up, I'll give it a quick review and take top billing on the by-line? ;)
Posted by: Chad | December 21, 2005 9:37 AM
Speaking of drafts, we can discuss it February 4.
Posted by: Joe Kristan | December 21, 2005 10:09 AM