So many of the tax laws passed in the last six years
"sunset" in the next four years that I'd be surprised
if there are not major tax changes in the next (2009)
Congress if the parties in power change.

"Thomas" <tho[at]mas.zo> writes:

- quote -

Currently, the tax rules are such that you can only do a Roth
conversion on a traditional IRA if your other income is less than
$100K. The limit is the same $100K for a married couple as for
singles. That limit is going away entirely in 2010. So, if you're
making too much money to do a Roth conversion now, you'll be able to
do so in another few years. And, if you're making too much money to
make a Roth contribution now, you can make a nondeductible contribution
to a traditional IRA now, and Roth convert it after 2010.

Generally, most 401(k) plans don't allow you to do a rollover to an
IRA unless you quit your job or retire. But if you have money sitting
around in old 401(k) accounts from former employers, you'd become eligible
to Roth-convert those moneys in 2010 even if you can't do so now.

Being eligible to do a Roth conversion doesn't necessarily mean it's a
good idea! It only makes sense to convert an amount that you have
enough cash from other sources to pay the taxes on, and that doesn't bump
you up into a higher tax bracket.

Here's an article that explains some of the implications of the
change. It also has a big warning that Congress might vote to change
the law again before it even takes effect.

http://www.fairmark.com/rothira/expand.htm

-Sandra the cynic

Thomas wrote:

- quote -

from http://www.rothira.com "Starting in 2010, the existing $100,000
income test for converting a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA will no
longer apply. Conversions that occur in 2010 will be able to have half
of the taxable converted amount taxed in 2011 and the other half taxed
in 2012."*

It can be of a benefit to you in that if you put $4000 ($5000 if you are
50 or older) into a nondeductible IRA for 2006-2009, you will have
$16,000 or more plus the earnings. At conversion in 2010, only the
earnings would be subject to income tax, and the gains are spread over
two years.

Note: For any readers who have IRA deposits which are pretax, the
conversion rules require you to prorate your entire IRA balance to
calculate what is taxable at conversion. e.g. If you made $10K in pretax
deposits, and $20 in non deductible deposits, and the account is now
worth $50K, 80% of Roth conversion would be taxable (10/50 = 20% is not
taxed). This is a general remark, not to the OP.

*I also wonder how much confusion will ensue as those who wanted to make
their annual conversion find their tax preparers trying to claim the tax
in a later year, when the client wanted the 2010 conversion taxed in the
year it was converted. H.R.4297 states "unless the taxpayer elects not
to have this clause apply". So one can continue with their annual plan,
if that's their choice.

JOE
JoeTaxpayer.com

can someone explain the 2010 Roth Conversion rules and regulations

is it of benefit only to a person with a 401k at present time?