Someone
recently asked me what happened to their IRA after he died. He was under the
impression that since the total value of his estate was under $1 million, no
one would have to pay taxes on his IRA after he died. (Note the $5.12 million
estate tax exclusion for 2012 is scheduled to decline to $1 million in 2013
unless Congress changes the law, which is why the million dollar threshold is
important.)
Was it
a Roth IRA? I asked. Nope. It was a regular IRA. I next asked who he had named
as the beneficiary. Beneficiary? He said.
I
figured he was not alone, hence the post.
If you
own an IRA and have not found the elixir of immortality (and the tax laws don’t
change) regardless of the total size of your estate, unless you give it away to
charity, someone is going to have to pay income taxes on the distributions from
your IRA.
If you
already know everything in your estate planning around your IRA is splendid, congratulations.
If not, here’s a three-step approach you should consider. Depending on your
knowledge and patience, you might be well advised to seek professional estate
tax guidance while you implement this suggestion.
Step 1:
Determine what beneficiary designation you have in effect.
Step 2:
Determine the required distributions and tax effects of your current
designation.
Step 2:
Modify your designation if appropriate.
Step 1:
The
recordkeeper for your IRA should have your beneficiary designations on file. If
you are not completely sure of your current beneficiary designations, ask the
recordkeeper. (If that is a mutual fund, brokerage firm or the like, you can
probably find the information through your online account. That’s how I review
and change mine at Vanguard.)
Step 2:
The
rules around the timing and amount of distributions from an inherited IRA are very
complex, and I won’t deal with them here. You’ll need a good tax advisor or
plenty of patience to sort them out. This much is always the case: whenever a
regular IRA makes a distribution, it triggers a taxable event. It doesn’t
matter if you took the distribution, the estate takes the distribution or the
IRA passes to a specific beneficiary and that person takes the distribution.
Get a payment; owe income tax.
That
means:
If you
are giving part of your estate to a charity, gifting IRA monies makes a lot of
sense because the money passes tax-free. (And if you are subject to the estate
tax, donations to charity are subtracted from your estate prior to determining
the tax.)
If you
are giving part of your estate to someone with a much lower marginal tax rate,
gifting IRA monies also makes sense since the beneficiary will net more that
way than if your estate pays the income tax and then gives the remainder to
your beneficiary.
If you
are giving part of our estate to someone with a higher marginal tax rate,
gifting an IRA benefits government not that beneficiary because your
beneficiary will pay more taxes than your estate would have.
If the
beneficiary has the same marginal tax rate as you, then the primary
consideration becomes when the IRA can/must be paid out.
Step 3:
In
January of each year I estimate the value of my estate upon my demise. When I
do that, it’s important to apply realistic values of assets with no readily
available market value (such as housing.) When in doubt, go for a slightly
conservative value and then round down.
I then
determine the amounts I expect to go to each charity I’ve named in my estate
plan.
I then
take those amounts, divide by the total value of my taxable IRA (not Roth IRA)
and designate that percentage to go to each charity.
A
simplified example may make it all clear:
Total
conservative estimated estate value is say $1,000,000.
Amount
going to The Nature Conservancy is 10% or $100,000.
Total
value of taxable IRA is say $400,000.
Total
value of other assets is $600,000, and we’ll assume they are not subject to income
taxes.
Percentage
of taxable IRA for The Nature Conservancy (TNC): $100,000/$400,000 = 25%
In
addition to the analysis I do in January, I also review these calculations
immediately after I take out my annual distribution. Depending on how the
investments have done in the intervening period and the size of the
distribution relative to the total value, I may need to readjust my percentage
allocations.
That in
a nutshell is the strategy. Why bother?
In the
example above, beneficiaries would ultimately have to pay taxes on the
remaining $300,000 of the taxable IRA ($400,000 total minus the $100,000 going
to TNC). If I had not designated The Nature Conservancy as a specific
beneficiary for the IRA, only $40,000 of the IRA would have “gone” to them,
leaving $360,000 of the IRA eventually taxable. The remaining $60,000 of the
donation to TNC comes from the “nontaxable assets.”
If you
are like Mitt Romney and have an average Federal tax rate of 15% (I’m not as lucky as
he; I have to pay over 18% for 2011), here’s the difference:
When
you give TNC the $100,000 from the IRA, the taxable amount is the $300,000
remainder, which generates $45,000 in taxes.
If TNC
gets 10% of everything, then the remaining taxable IRA is $360,000 and the tax
is $54,000.
That’s
$9,000 the government gets rather than your beneficiaries. While poor planning
on the part of politicians has created the Federal Government’s budget woes, that’s
no reason to give them extra funds because of poor planning on your part.
~ Jim
No comments:
Post a Comment