JoeTaxpayer

Some time ago, in an article titled Social Insecurity, I wrote about what I call Phantom Tax Rates. To understand this, one first must understand what one’s Marginal Tax Rate is. A single person, after taking his exemption, and deductions, will pay 10% of the amount up to $16,050, then 15% from $16,050 to $65,100, then 25% from $65,100 up to $131,450. Let’s stop there. The Phantom Tax Rate comes into play when there is either a phase out of deductions or phase in of other income. In the case of Social Security, when half of your Social Security benefits plus other income exceed $25,000 ($32,000 if married filing joint) your benefits start to become taxable, until 85% of your benefits are fully taxed. This create a graph that looks as follows;

While we would expect a 15% rate from $16,050 right to $65,100, instead we find that for each $1000 of income (or IRA withdrawals for the person for whom this chart applied) that the incremental tax is as high as $462.50.

In another situation, the adoption credit is phased out for AGIs between $174,730 and $214,730, and in the case I’ve been alerted to, the taxpayer loses $11,600 on the next $40,000 of income due to this phaseout. This loss, plus his marginal rate of 25% total 54.13%. My advice to him was to defer income if possible to 2009, which he will. By deferring that $40,000 worth of income he will pay $26,600 less tax this year, and just $10,000 when he receives this income in 2009.

When it comes to taxes, nothing is simple. When planning, it’s best to get a copy of TurboTax and run a few ‘what-if’ scenarios to best understand the impact of any financial changes you may incur.
Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: adoption credit, income, IRA, irs, marginal tax rate, phantom tax rate, social insecurity, Social Security, tax rates, Taxes

Last September I wrote a post titled “Zero Interest Redux” in which I discussed the impact to one’s FICO score and how borrowing large sums off a credit card at zero interest can hurt your score in the short run. In May, I posted “Free FICO Score” about my discovery that WAMU (Washington Mutual) offered free access to your FICO score if you are a credit card holder.

The access to the report has been a bit sporadic. I was able to pull a number in April, but then no access till July when I received my warning email that my score “had changed more than 20 points.” Fair enough. The April score was 746. Since then I pulled one more $30,000 zero interest loan, and put it against my mortgage. The zero interest deal was for 24 months, and we’ll be able to pay it in full when it comes due. I also added a credit card which offered higher airline miles, a CitiBank Amex card, in addition the CitiBank Visa we had. So I went to the WAMU site, and much to my surprise, my score was up to 773. Even so, it offered suggestions as to how to raise it further;

1. The proportion of balances to credit limits on your revolving/charge accounts is too high
Analysis of consumer credit behavior repeatedly finds that owing a substantial balance on revolving/charge accounts (Visa, MasterCard, Discover, American Express, Diners Club, department store cards, etc.) relative to the amount of revolving/charge credit available to you represents increased risk.

2. The time since your most recent account opening is very recent
Research shows that consumers who have recently opened new credit accounts are slightly more likely to miss payments than those who have not. This is not an especially strong risk factor, and therefore usually means a difference of no more than a few points in a consumer’s FICO score.

That first one is interesting, they go on to suggest “Bear in mind that even if you pay off your credit cards in full each and every month, your credit bureau report may show the last billing statement balance on those accounts” Which means that giving up the float (the time from when the bill is cut to the time it’s due) or some portion of it, will help your score further. Let’s look at the math on that. If you are earning (or paying) 5% as the cost of capital, $1000 will cost you $2.75 for a 20 day float. If your credit card bill is $3000 each month, that’s about $8.25/mo to improve your FICO score. To be clear, this suggests that you make a payment before the bill is cut, so whatever you spent over the month does not show as a balance due.

The alternative to this would be to contact the issuing bank and request a credit line increase, or to use multiple cards, keeping the maximum balance on any one card below about 30% of its credit line.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: Credit, credit card, credit cards, department store cards, fico, free fico score, interest, irs, loan, Mortgage

Regular readers know how I feel about variable annuities, but have little issue with the immediate annuity. Now, one issue that would hit us if you wished to put an immediate annuity inside an IRA is the calculation of RMDs and taking RMDs that may exceed the cash available within the IRA.

IRS Regulation section 1.401 (a) (9)-6 offers a solution.

If an immediate annuity is qualified and based on a payout scheme that is not intended to exceed your life expectancy the annual payout satisfies the RMD requirement even if it is less than would otherwise
be required. Perhaps a bit of an obscure issue, but one you may run into at retirement.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: annuity, immediate annuity, IRA, irs, irs regulation, Retirement, RMD, variable annuities

I usually don’t post on Sunday, so this post is going to be a bit off topic, a few general thoughts. First, I’m happy to see readership growing over the past weeks,

as well as steadily over the past 6 months.

I’ve gotten many comments, most of which are positive, all of which are welcome.

Recently, I’ve started posting about the Money Merge Account, and my feelings regarding that product. Lest this blog turn into my soapbox for ranting, I’ve decided to commit to a steady pattern of posts on Mon/Wed/Fri as I’ve been maintaining, and when I have more to say regarding MMA, I will add an extra post on either a Tuesday or Thursday. Other than that, I am trying to vary post topics, so technical, limited interest topics affecting a tiny percent of taxpayers will not appear more than every few weeks. I think there’s a need to bring those topics up as obscure as they may be. As always, your input is welcome and appreciated. Questions, and/or topic suggestion are always welcome.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: interest, irs, mma, money, money merge account, soapbox, tax

I continue to be amused by the debate over whether the ‘Debt Snowball‘ that Dave Ramsey suggests is the best method for fast debt reduction. I wrote about this some time ago on my Feature Web Site, and got quite a bit of email telling me how I ignored the emotional side. They quoted Dave Ramsey, “personal finance is 20% head knowledge, 80% behavior”.
Today I came across the web site “Consumerism Commentary”, which had a nice spin on paying the highest interest debts first (as I suggest), but calling this method “The Debt Avalanche“. Sounds good to me. Nice article.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: dave ramsey, debt, debt snowball, Finance, interest, irs, Personal Finance

I recently fielded this multi-part question;

First, is conversion from a traditional IRA to Roth IRA still OK when over 70 and taking RMDs (required minimum distributions)?

Ok? It’s fantastic!! I will first tell you that I believe that Roth’s value while working is slightly exaggerated. Your scenario above is ideal. I have an 80+ yr old client who is in the 15% bracket. Each year we convert just enough to ‘top off’ that bracket so the next hundred dollars would have been taxed at 25%.

Second, does the “conversion” count as part of RMD?

No, the conversion must take place after you calculate the RMD. Our RMD is based on 12/31/07 year end balance. We can do the Roth conversion any time during the year, but that RMD is fixed.

Third, is it possible to transfer stock directly from Traditional IRA to Roth IRA — using current valuation on day of transfer as the basis for amount of conversion?

Yes - you can convert stock, the broker will report that value based on the day of conversion. There is no wash sale selling in one IRA and buying in another, anyway.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: IRA, irs, required minimum distribution, roth conversion, roth ira, tax, traditional ira

If you don’t own a rental property, this may not interest you. If you do, read on.

One of the rules of rental property is that you must take depreciation each year. To be clear, whether or not you “take” the depreciation on your Schedule E each year you must recapture all the required depreciation regardless. Until now, many who did not understand this wound up going back to their returns and amending them for the last three years, but losing the benefit of all the deprecation not taken.

I recently came across an article titled Allowed or Allowable which discusses new revelations that may help you recoup the money you’d have otherwise lost. The article suggests a change in accounting method, and IRS bulletin 2004-3 confirms the content of the article I cited.

As I stated in my introduction, this impacts few people, but those impacted have the chance to save quite a bit of money by reading the above.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: depreciation, irs, rental property

If this past April 15, you found yourself on the receiving side, getting a refund on your taxes, consider adjusting your withholdings. The IRS web site has an online calculator which will help you determine the correct number of exemptions to claim on your W4 submitted to your employer. If you were using your tax withholdings as a vacation fund, why not consider having a fixed amount saved from each paycheck and moved to a savings account? At least if you need these funds during the year, they will be available. Otherwise you are lending Uncle Sam money and not getting any interest.

Joe

written by JOE \\ tags: interest, irs, money, Savings, tax withholdings, Taxes, w4

Today I caught a bit of CNBC, in which there was a brief discussion of the AMT. The AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) was put in place to be sure that the wealthy were not able to gather so many deductions and tax loopholes that they could avoid paying taxes on all their income. Good idea in theory, but in practice the AMT amount was never adjusted for inflation and is now hitting people it was never intended to. People who live in a state with high taxes are now finding that their Real Estate taxes and/or State Income Tax are no longer deductible, but wiped out by the AMT.

written by JOE \\ tags: AMT, income tax, irs, tax, unintended consequences