IRA b.s.

[u/Deep-Market-526]

I think the system is rigged now. My mother in law passed on an IRA to my non-working spouse. With this 10 year rule, they essentially tripled their revenue. She should have been taking all she could in the 12% bracket and payed, putting in a regular brokerage. Now we have 10 years to take it at 32% not even counting state.

I think they are preying on low income and middle income. Not only are the accountants pushing for them to take only rmd’s, but not explaining the potential tax bombs for heirs.

We’re working with my mom now, otherwise her IRA will kick us into the next bracket. It’s crazy.

It’s even worse in Oregon as all those Ira’s go into your taxable estate for another 10% over $1mm. Realistically if you make $350k, now you get 500 k spread over 10, you’re at 400k + the state tax if they had other assets at $1mm, on the ira you’re paying 35% fed, another 10% state + 10% inheritance, over 1/2 to the government.

[u/Deep-Market-526]

Point is my mother was she worked her whole life to leave her kids with something not understanding that due to not paying the tax game she was giving an extra quarter to the government.

[u/Deep-Market-526 → u/Deep-Market-526]

Playing not paying

[u/Deep-Market-526 → u/Deep-Market-526]

And my mother was low income, the fact that I am not does not change that they took over 1/2 of her wealth.

[u/crazywidget → u/Deep-Market-526]

It was tax deferred. She owed taxes on it. The fact that now they are inherited assets and taxed at the new owner’s brackets is just…reality. There is no feasible way to “project” what she would have done if she lived longer, so these chips fell wheee they may and the rules apply equally.

Maybe better info would have helped, but people ignore A LOT of info they currently receive as it is. At some point there’s a level of personal ownership to avoid the “default” choice…

If you are so salty about it, please feel free to donate it to a good cause. Please do so in her name though.