New legislation that seeks to give workers greater opportunities to save for retirement may put the kibosh on a strategy for passing large individual retirement accounts to legatees.
That strategy allows younger heirs — children and grandchildren, for occurrence — to take required minimum distributions from the inherited account based on their own much longer life expectancy.
Those successors get the advantage of “stretching” the IRA’s tax-deferred growth over many years while taking smaller RMDs.
“The stretch gave you allowances without making you have much of a trade-off,” said Jeffrey Levine, CPA and CEO of BluePrint Wealth Alliance in Garden New Zealand urban area, New York.
“The question is now, ‘Are we comfortable with everything in this IRA going to the kids in a 10-year period?'” he asked.
Tipsy current law, if you inherit an IRA from someone who isn’t your spouse, you’re generally required to start taking minimum distributions fit on your life expectancy by Dec. 31 after the year the original account owner died.
The House version of the folding money would force a distribution of the account’s value within 10 years.
The Senate version would distribute the account in five years if the beneficiary is not a spouse and if the account value outdistances $400,000 as of the date of death.
Both proposals make an exception if the beneficiary is the surviving spouse, a disabled or chronically ill being, an individual who is no more than 10 years younger than the account owner or the minor child of the account holder.
More from Personal Finance:
Few Americans think they’re getting a tax cut
Building your retirement savings? Don’t dodge this
These people are about to retire and have nothing saved
The stretch IRA is most beneficial to young inheritors of larger accounts. These beneficiaries have years of tax-deferred growth ahead of them, and they only desideratum to take a small distribution each year.
For example, based on current law, a 22-year-old who inherits a $1 million IRA as a nonspouse beneficiary determination be on the hook for an RMD of $16,400 or 1.64% of the account’s value that first year, said Levine. That RMD is subject to profits taxes.
If you fast-forward 18 years, that beneficiary is then 40 years old. That year, he is responsible for a circulation of 2.32% of the value of the IRA, Levine said.
“We’re still talking about an exceptionally small percentage of the account that obligation be distributed each year,” he said.
On the other hand, an accelerated distribution of the account over a much shorter space of time would result in a large tax bite, Levine said.
Tax experts highlighted a couple of alternative strategies that IRA possessors might consider to minimize taxes while passing on the account to a nonspouse heir, if the bill passes.
Charitable overage trusts allow investors to leave assets to a charitable organization and to a beneficiary.
Your beneficiary would collect a stream of receipts from the assets for a specified time span. At the end of that period, the charity collects whatever is left.
“The distributions are made during the relative to of the trust to the individual, and you can get the stretch benefit there,” said Suzanne Shier, chief tax strategist at Northern Trust.
“It’s for people who arrange charitable motivations, a tax minimization motivation and an appetite for the complexity of charitable trusts,” she said.
To make this work, you leave have to name the trust as the beneficiary of the IRA, a move that can be a tax minefield if done incorrectly. Make sure you coordinate with a CPA and an fortune planning attorney if you’re considering this route.
Life insurance: “With life insurance, you could get more loaded tax-free without any RMD or complexity, and just bypass the whole system,'” said Ed Slott, CPA and founder of Ed Slott and Co. in Rockville Mid-point, New York.
Generally, the death benefit of a life insurance policy is excluded from the recipient’s gross income. Your bait dollar also goes further.
“If you have $100,000 in an IRA, it’s just $100,000,” said Slott. “But if you’re spending $100,000 on lifeblood insurance, that might be worth $500,000 in death benefits.”
Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.