Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

M*: The IRS Takes A Big Step Toward A Small Reduction In RMDs


  • edited November 2019
    What in the world is the writer referencing? A stand alone IRS rule/reg change or an indirect reference to the Secure Act? Tis not too difficult to link some reference, either internal to M* or a valid outside source.
    Gzzzzzzzzzzz.....wasted electrons for the write, IMHO.

    From Aug. 2019 regarding the Secure Act

    Click SECURE ACT link in the linked MFO write just above.
  • Strip away much the text and what the writer is referencing becomes clearer:
    Unlike Congress, the IRS has been working on the issue and took an important first step toward reducing RMDs for most retirees. ... Back in January, I observed that if the IRS recalculated these two-decade-old mortality tables and updated the rules, it would be modestly helpful but wouldn’t make that big a difference. ... Now that the IRS has formally proposed a change, it turns out this intuition was right. ... It seems very likely that this rule will become a final regulation sometime in 2020.
    Embedded in the column is a link internal to M*:
    One obvious thing to do would be to adjust the mortality assumptions that drive these RMDs, because they are going on 20 years old. In fact, President Donald Trump directed the Treasury Department to do just that, and when the government reopens, it will likely propose some adjustments. However, while life expectancy has increased, my back-of-the-envelope calculations reveal that such a change would not make much difference.
    For a robust analysis, including copious links, see Kitces:
  • Hi @msf
    I'll bite my tongue with this one. I should've held my comment when being on the run and short of time prior to holiday travel; and taken more time to review the dates in the article.
    I still feel the writer should have referenced the included language in the SECURE ACT regarding changing the RMD age, and if or how; if the legislation is passed in tact by the Senate may be a blended rule/reg change based with what he wrote. I was too fixated with the SECURE ACT language.
    Take care,
Sign In or Register to comment.