|
With the advent of the Roth IRA,
financial and estate planners have been given a new tool to optimize
retirement and estate plans for individuals with significant assets
in their retirement plans. A
Roth IRA has the potential to provide a great source of wealth for
your clients and their heirs. This article will quantify the
exceptional value a Roth IRA has as part of an estate.
An in-depth analysis of the
merits of converting a regular IRA to a Roth IRA is beyond the scope
of this article.1 However, we do believe that, for individuals who
qualify, it is definitely worth considering a Roth IRA conversion.
Jim Lange’s peer reviewed article IRAs
After the TRA ‘97—What Hath Congress Roth? provides conclusive evidence that
the benefits of a Roth IRA conversion extend to both the owner
during his/her lifetime and to his/her heirs. This article focuses
on quantifying the benefit to the heirs.
For the purposes of this article,
we compare and contrast the estates of two individuals:
One
individual elects to convert $100,000 of his IRA into a Roth
IRA. We assume that the client will preserve the Roth IRA
investment with its tax-free status and no minimum distribution
requirements, and spend other assets first to provide for
his/her retirement. As such, when the time comes to distribute
this estate, the Roth IRA owner continues to have significant
holdings in his Roth IRA, and fewer assets in other after-tax
investments.
The
second individual elects to retain his conventional IRA (the no
conversion scenario). If the client lives long enough, the IRA
is substantially diminished due to the minimum distribution
requirements. When the time comes to distribute this estate, we
assume that the IRA holdings are substantially reduced but that
the owner still has significant assets in after-tax investments,
such as cash, stocks, bonds, mutual funds, CDs, and savings
accounts.
The
“Hidden” Value of a Roth
To quantify the advantages of a conversion, it
is necessary to "run the numbers" to see how our clients’
money will grow and be used throughout their lifetime. We do this by
comparing the projected outcomes from our two scenarios—converting
$100,000 of the IRA to a Roth IRA versus maintaining the status quo or
not converting the IRA. In most cases, using reasonable assumptions, it is clear that
the Roth IRA conversion will generate substantial additional wealth
for the owner and their surviving spouse during his/her lifetime.2 Occasionally the projections for both scenarios do not
seem appreciably different. That is to say, at the end of the
client’s and their spouse’s life expectancies, the two estates
contain roughly the same value of assets measured in immediate
purchasing power.
However, simply comparing the total number of
dollars available to each estate at the time of the client’s death
is not a very sophisticated analysis.
Too frequently the estate planning stops here and the client
makes the inappropriate decision not
to convert to a Roth IRA. This
estate planning decision may result in the loss of a valuable
opportunity. To fully appreciate the merits of inheriting a Roth IRA,
we need to project the analysis over a much longer time scale.
Let’s assume we have run the numbers and the
two estate projections contain the same purchasing power measured as
if all the money were to be spent the day after death.
Measured in immediate purchasing power, the estate containing
the Roth IRA has no advantages over the estate comprised primarily of
after-tax investments. An after-tax dollar in your pocket will buy the
same cup of coffee as the dollar in your pocket from a Roth IRA.
The same holds true for your client’s heirs upon inheritance
of those assets.3
On the face of it, the two projections seem equal. If your client’s
heirs intend to immediately liquidate their inheritance for reasons such as debt
retirement or for spending purposes, there are no advantages to
inheriting a Roth IRA over after-tax investments. However, if your
client’s heirs maintain the investment and take only the minimum
required distributions through their lifetime, then your client’s
Roth IRA conversion will provide his heirs with a monumental benefit.
The inherited Roth IRA has a “hidden” value
in the estate. The value of an estate should
be measured in the hands of your client's heirs.
If the heirs spend or withdraw the Roth IRA money immediately
upon inheritance, the strategic value of passing on the Roth IRA is
lost. If the heirs
are interested in providing for their future, they will choose to let
the Roth IRA continue to grow, income tax-free, perhaps only depleting
the Roth IRA funds by their required minimum distributions based on
the heir’s life expectancy. This exceptional tax-free growth potential
makes converting to a Roth IRA a significant estate-planning tool. The
dollar value of the inheritance at the time of death is paltry
compared to its potential worth when it is kept in the tax-free
environment for as long as possible.
So, how do you measure the potential
value of a Roth IRA?
The Sustained
Significance of a Roth IRA
For our scenarios, the heir is an only child who
is 50 years old when the second parent dies. At fifty years old an
individual has an actuarial life expectancy of 33.1 years.
Assuming the beneficiary makes an election to receive
distributions over his or her lifetime, the minimum required
distribution for the first year would be the balance in the Roth IRA
divided by 33.1, or roughly 3% of the balance.
The minimum distribution for the second year would be the
balance at the end of the previous year divided by 32.1.
For the third year, the minimum distribution would be the
balance at the end of the previous year divided by 31.1, etc.
This is analogous to the term-certain distribution method based
on a single life expectancy.
The following examples show that, over time,
your heirs can realize appreciably more value from a Roth IRA
inheritance than an inheritance of after-tax investments.
The projected advantage of the Roth IRA is expressed as a
percentage of the value of the inherited after-tax funds.
For example, if the Roth IRA funds will produce 10% more in
benefits for the heir, then the value will be 110% of the value of the
after-tax fund inheritance, and therefore, have a 10% advantage.
Example I
Let us compare an heir who inherits $100,000 in
a Roth IRA to an heir who inherits $100,000 in after-tax investments.
The investment rates of return and other basic assumptions include:
An overall return on investment (ROI) of 8%
per year. Of the overall rate of return, 70% is capital
appreciation and 30% is ordinary income from interest, dividends,
and short-term capital gain.
Of the accumulated capital appreciation, 15%
of the beginning of year balance is realized as long-term capital
gains from portfolio turnover. (Please
note that the previous two assumptions, while probably realistic,
diminish the value of the conversion.
If the child invests in taxable bonds so that there would
be no capital appreciation and 100% ordinary income, the benefit
of the Roth conversion would be significantly higher than the
numbers indicate).
A
50 year old has a standard life expectancy of 33.1 years, and this
establishes the annual required minimum distributions from the
Roth IRA. Each year both heirs will withdraw and spend only an
amount equal to the minimum required distributions from the Roth
IRA.
The
income tax rates on investment income produced by the after-tax
funds are 28% federal and 3% state for ordinary income, and 20%
federal and 3% state for long-term capital gain income.
The results of the calculations are outlined
below. It shows the age of the beneficiary and the total funds
available for the beginning of each of the first five years and each
five-year period thereafter. Also shown is the annual spending amount
for these years based on the minimum required distribution from the
inherited Roth IRA. Additionally,
we include a column that estimates the income taxes that would have to
be paid on the after-tax investments for
the year presented.
Chart
I
| Beneficiary’s |
Available
Balance at Beginning of Year |
Taxes on |
| Age at Start |
Inherited |
Inherited |
Annual |
After-Tax |
| Of Year |
Roth IRA Funds |
After-Tax Funds |
Spending |
Funds |
| 50 |
$ 100,000 |
$ 100,000 |
$
3,021 |
$
780 |
| 51 |
104,979 |
104,199 |
3,270 |
1,039 |
| 52 |
110,107 |
108,225 |
3,540 |
1,268 |
| 53 |
115,375 |
112,075 |
3,833 |
1,473 |
| 54 |
120,772 |
115,735 |
4,150 |
1,657 |
| 55 |
126,283 |
119,187 |
4,494 |
1,822 |
| 60 |
154,807 |
132,206 |
6,702 |
2,443 |
| 65 |
181,553 |
133,152 |
10,031 |
2,781 |
| 70 |
197,895 |
110,291 |
15,106 |
2,768 |
| 75 |
186,618 |
42,671 |
23,039 |
2,106 |
| 80 |
113,499 |
0 |
36,613 (a) |
0 |
Spending during age 80 is
available from the Roth IRA inheritance only, since the after-tax
inheritance is fully depleted by age 77.
As time goes on, the value of
the remaining Roth IRA inheritance is greater than the remaining
after-tax inheritance due to the tax-free growth of the Roth IRA. A
graph of the balances remaining at different ages for the beneficiary
follows:
For the non-conversion
scenario, income taxes must be paid on the investment income of the
after-tax funds. The combination of the tax withdrawals and spending
withdrawals (at the same rate as the tax-free spending withdrawals
from the Roth IRA) reduce the principal to zero by age 77, whereas the
Roth IRA would still have $167,647 available. The Roth IRA funds
"run out" at age 84 because of the minimum distribution
requirements. We can continue the comparison past the time the
after-tax inheritance is gone by showing, as an annual benefit, the
minimum distribution from the Roth IRA until it is gone as well.
However, one should not determine value by how long the minimum
distributions last because the minimum distribution amounts increase
significantly during these last years.
Even
considering the effects of inflation, the required minimum
distributions from the inherited Roth IRA increase significantly.
Assuming 4% inflation as a conservative, i.e. high, approximation of
the long-term inflation rate, a graph in constant dollars of the
annual amounts spent follows:
This graph shows that the last
years of minimum distributions are the greatest.
From Chart I, the $36,613 annual spending amount during age 80
translates into $10,854 in today’s dollars, as is reflected in the
graph above. We have assumed the above spending pattern for
distributions from both the conversion scenario and the non-conversion
scenario.
Obviously, the heir who
received the Roth IRA funds has received more than the other heir. How
do we measure this additional value?
Measuring
Value with Present Value Calculations
Present value calculations
provide a way to figure out how much money you would need
to have today, invested at a typical interest rate, to give you
the same amount of money that, in the case of our example, will be
inherited. In other words, for our example, the present value
calculation tells you how much you should be willing to pay now to buy your future inheritance: how much should you be willing
to pay for the Roth inheritance vs. the after-tax inheritance.
By simply projecting the
dollar amounts, as illustrated above, the amounts received in the
future seem very large, but that is because there is a long time lapse
between now and then—you could achieve the same large numbers by
investing a small amount now, and that smaller amount is the
“present value” of the future income.
The present value discount
rate we will use is 7%, which estimates an expected rate of investment
return of about 8%, less about 1% for income taxes on the investment
income that would have to be paid if the money was not invested in a
Roth IRA.
We also examine the effects on
the inheritance should it grow at a higher than expected rate such as
11%. However, we do not change the present value discount rate used in
valuing future spending withdrawals since it is an expected growth
rate. We increase both the Roth IRA inheritance and the after-tax
inheritance by this 11% annual growth rate and compare the results
using the present value discount rate. This projection demonstrates
that the comparative advantage of a Roth IRA inheritance is greatly
increased if an above-average rate of investment return is achieved.
In other words, if your heirs are able to achieve an 11% return
on the inherited Roth IRA, then it will be an even more valuable
inheritance than after-tax funds earning the same return.
An inherited Roth IRA has a
minimum distribution requirement that is calculated based on the
beneficiary’s life expectancy. Assuming that each year both
individuals spend an amount equal to the minimum distribution from the
Roth IRA, the Roth IRA inheritance lasts longer. The beneficiary of
the after-tax investments has to withdraw additional amounts from the
after-tax inheritance to pay the taxes on investment income to end up
with the same amount of spending money as the beneficiary of the Roth
IRA.
Beginning in the first year,
the remaining balance in the Roth IRA becomes higher than the
after-tax funds. Therefore, measured through any given time in the future, the
present value of the inheritance can be measured by the total of all
the present values of each annual withdrawal plus the present value of
the remaining balance at the time the Roth IRA will be depleted.
Using the information from our
example above, the following chart shows the results measured through
the end of each five-year period into the future:
Chart
II
| Beneficiary’s |
Present
Value of Available Balance
at the Beginning of the Year |
Present Values of |
Age at
Start of Year |
Inherited
Roth IRA Funds |
Inherited
After-Tax
Funds |
Spending
Withdrawals |
| 51 |
$ 98,111 |
$
97,382 |
$
2,824 |
| 56 |
87,885 |
81,564 |
17,448 |
| 61 |
76,248 |
63,490 |
32,980 |
| 66 |
63,020 |
44,372 |
49,530 |
| 71 |
47,969 |
24,451 |
67,252 |
| 76 |
30,738 |
3,606 |
86,411 |
Please note that in Chart I,
the Roth IRA funds seemed to grow substantially for 20 years after
inheritance because it shows the actual dollar balance. But Chart II,
measures the funds in terms of present value.
By adding the cumulative
present values of the spending to the present values of the beginning
of year total funds available, we can now measure the percentage
by which the value of the Roth IRA inheritance exceeds an inheritance
of the same amount of after-tax funds.
Beneficiary’s
Age at the |
Percent
Advantage
Achieved by |
| Beginning of
the Year |
Roth IRA
Funds |
| 56 |
6.38% |
| 61 |
13.22% |
| 66 |
19.86% |
| 71 |
25.65% |
| 76 |
30.14% |
This tells us that by
successfully keeping the distributions from the Roth IRA funds to a
minimum for 25 years, the 50 year old beneficiary has achieved a value
from the Roth IRA 30% greater than after-tax funds.
This would indicate that $1.00 of Roth IRA money in an estate
is really worth $1.30 if the beneficiary takes only minimum
distributions over his/her life expectancy.
This is a reasonable assumption since it is to the
beneficiaries advantage to not withdraw any more than the minimum from
the Roth IRA that is growing income tax free.
But we like to see other “what-if” scenarios, so let’s
play with the numbers.
The famous Ibbotson study,
which detailed the history of investment returns from 1926 onward,
concluded that money invested in the S&P 500 Index from the
beginning of 1926 to the end of 1998 earned 11.2%. Even if we round
down the 11.2% to 11%, and use an 11% investment rate of return
instead of 8%, with all other factors being the same, the 30%
advantage by age 75 becomes a large 53% advantage. This means that
given a rate of return less than the historical S&P 500 Index, and
assuming the beneficiary withdraws only the minimum distribution from
the Roth IRA, $1.00 of a Roth IRA in an estate is really worth $1.53
to a 50 year
old
beneficiary.
Using the original 8% rate of
return, if the beneficiary’s federal tax rate on ordinary income is
39.6% instead of 28%, the 30% advantage becomes a 35% advantage.
Combining both these new
assumptions, i.e. 11% return on investments and the 39.6% tax bracket,
the 30% advantage becomes a more significant 65% advantage.
Stated another way, this means that inheriting $100,000 in a
Roth IRA is actually worth $165,000 to the heir.
The graphic portrayal of the
Roth IRA advantage for all these scenarios is as follows:
Now let’s have some real
fun. Please assume that the beneficiary is a five year old
grandchild, not a 50 year old adult child.
Naming a five year old (of course in trust) increases the life
expectancy upon inheritance from 33.1 years to 76.6 years.
The higher life expectancy allows the beneficiary to continue
Roth IRA tax-free growth for much longer, as well as decreasing the
required distributions in the earlier years. The minimum required
distribution, for the grandchild, for the first year would be the
balance divided by 76.6 (years) versus the balance divided by one 33.1
(years) for the 50 year old adult child.
Keeping the original
assumptions of an 8% return on investment and the 28% tax bracket, the
Roth IRA inheritance advantage for the five year old grandchild for
the initial 25 year period is somewhat better than for the 50 year old
adult child—37% instead of 30%. However, the time horizon for
comparison can be much longer. After the interval between 50 and 55
years of age, the advantage the Roth IRA inheritance has over the
after-tax inheritance, is a tremendous 71%.
Continuing the analysis until all Roth IRA funds are withdrawn
(and assumed spent) until age 81, we find the advantage peaks at 80%.
These analyses incorporate the
present value discount rate. Representing the gains in future dollars
would make the total dollar amounts much greater. If the five year old
child is fortunate enough to be in the 39.6% tax bracket and to
achieve an 11% return on investments, he/she will achieve a maximum
advantage of 329% just prior to the time the Roth IRA inheritance is
fully spent at age 80. This
means for a five year old grandchild, an inherited Roth IRA may be
worth well over three times
the value of inherited after-tax funds.
The graph that follows plots
the Roth IRA advantage for both scenarios; with 8% and 11% returns on
investment and the 28% and 39.6% tax brackets:
We could go on and on with
variations on the assumptions, but it becomes clear that in the hands
of a child, or better yet a trust for a grandchild, an inherited Roth
could dwarf
the value of the same funds in the after-tax environment.
Conclusion
These illustrations
graphically demonstrate the potential value Roth IRAs have in an
estate. Making a significant Roth IRA conversion is usually very
beneficial for both your clients and their heirs. This article
supports arguments in favor of a Roth IRA conversion even if the
conversion does not significantly alter the total dollar value of the
estate at the time of death. The point is that even in the case where
the conversion results in a breakeven for the original IRA owner, when
the child or grandchild beneficiary elects to take only minimum
distributions from the Roth IRA, the Roth IRA’s value is
substantially greater than the value of the same amount of after-tax
funds. However, the
challenge of turning the inherited Roth IRA into a gold mine will fall
to your heirs. It is
essential that your clients and their beneficiaries understand that
the value is achieved over time, and that the Roth IRA should be
preserved in its tax-free environment as long as possible.
About
the Authors
|
Steven
T. Kohman works with James Lange
and Associates.
He is a Certified Public Accountant,
a Certified Valuation Analyst, and a Certified
Estate Planner.
Steven “runs the numbers” for the
firm’s retirement and estate and planning
clients to see how their estate monies will
grow and be spent during the owner’s lifetimes
and how they can best provide for their
beneficiaries. |
|
James
Lange
is
a tax attorney and CPA with a thriving retirement
and estate planning practice in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania. He
focuses on the unique needs of individuals
with appreciable assets in their IRAs and
401(k) plans. His
plans include tax-savvy advice, will and
trust preparation, and intricate beneficiary
designations for IRAs and other retirement
plans. Jim’s
advice and recommendations have received
national attention from syndicated columnist
Jane Bryant Quinn, and his articles are
frequently published in Financial
Planning, Kiplinger’s Retirement
Report and
The Tax Adviser.
|
|