- quote -


HOWEVER, in my experience (Licensed since 1963, received
my CLU designation in 1973, qualified as a Life Member of
Million Dollar Roundtable in 1978), I have found that most
government Pension programs are GRAND-FATHERED in
when a major change is made. Therefore, the "gamble" is
minimal.

Kalman J. Lester CLU

John,

I know that there is no crystal ball, but what do you think the odds of the
government changing the Roth rules between now and 2030? I have been
sacrificing the deductions and going the Roth route. I'm hoping that even
if the rules are changed, they will be changed for investments made from
that point on, and those who invested under certain assumptions would be
"grandfathered in".

Thx, JM

"John A. Weeks III" <john[at]johnweeks.com> wrote in message
news:260820041852171657%john[at]johnweeks.com...
- quote -

In article <jBqXc.238548$eM2.148820[at]attbi_s51> , Cal Lester
<cal-lester[at]comcast.net> wrote:

- quote -

I think that is kind of a gamble. If you do the 401K today, you
get the tax deduction for sure. You also get it when it means
a lot to the original poster (ie, lots of kids and expenses).
If you do the Roth, you are gambling that the government is not
going to change the rules between now and retirement, which is a
bet that I sure would not be willing to take. My experience with
government is that they attempt to screw the most number of people
they can most of the time.

For the poster, I'd recommend doing both--maxing out the 401K,
then putting as much as he can afford in to a Roth, up to the
legal and IRS limits.

-john-

--
================================================== ==================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708 john[at]johnweeks.com
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ==================

"Rachel Smith" <rachelms79[at]hotmail.com> wrote in message news:f1849f5a.0408260913.6afea588[at]posting.google.com...
- quote -


Since your Employer is only matching $.50 on a maximum
of 6%, it would seem dissadvantageous for you to be puting
in 12%.
I think that as you outlined above, it might be more advatageous
for you to put that EXTRA 6% or more into a ROTH IRA. You will
get the same tax deferral, but when you start to use it, it will come
to you INCOME TAX FREE............

Cal Lester CLU



- quote -

With several young kids and lots of deductions (mortgage interest,
local and state taxes, charity), my tax rate now is probably the
lowest it will ever be. I'm probably 30 years from retirement. I've
been maxing out my 401(k) investments for the past 13 years at my
employer (12% payroll deduction, employer matches $0.50 per dollar for
1st 6% of payroll deduction) but no other retirement investments.
When all the kids hit 18, and the mortgage is paid, my tax rate will
be higher, so it seems as though tax-deferral (ie. 401k) is not the
wisest move. Maybe I should pay the taxes now, when my rate is low.

So, should I reduce my tax-deferred investments and instead pay the
taxes now and invest elsewhere (bonds? stocks?). Advice welcome.

Thanks much.