help
edit

Forums
Finance

Traditional IRA Contribution for 2007

  • Text Only
  • Search this Topic »
  • switch to 'Classic' view
  • Go to Page :
  • 1 2
alert mods    

I changed my employer in 2007. My first employer was contributing to my 401K and contributed around 5.8K. My second employer did not contribute anything to 401K. Can I still contribute to Traditional IRA?

There was a clause in IRA on 1040 that "Are you enrolled in a qualified retirement plan at work"..look for Box 12b in w2 form. Since my first employer contributed to 401k, box 12b is checked on my first employer w2. Box 12b is not checked for second employer W2. I do not know if I'm covered by retirement plan or not in 2007.

Please advise.

Quick Summary is created and edited by users like you... Add FAQ's, Links and other Relevant Information by clicking the edit button in the lower right hand corner of this message.

alert mods    

The only contributions that count are the ones that you make, not your employer.

alert mods    

Thanks Venturion..

I'm sorry..i found out that I contributed 5.8K in 401K. Can I still contribute to Traditional IRA?

alert mods    

No sweat. Your eligibility to contribute to an IRA or ROTH IRA are not linked to your participation in a 401(k) plan. The IRA (or Roth) eligibility is linked solely to having income, being below certain thresholds for MAGI (101K for single and 159K for married joint), and a combined limit of 4K for both if you're under 50 and 5K for over 50. I'm remembering much of this from memory, so consult with your tax adviser and/or IRS for concrete answers.

alert mods    

FWF the new google

alert mods    

Its better than google sometimes..)

alert mods    

Venturion said:No sweat. Your eligibility to contribute to an IRA or ROTH IRA are not linked to your participation in a 401(k) plan. The IRA (or Roth) eligibility is linked solely to having income, being below certain thresholds for MAGI (101K for single and 159K for married joint), and a combined limit of 4K for both if you're under 50 and 5K for over 50. I'm remembering much of this from memory, so consult with your tax adviser and/or IRS for concrete answers.

I think it's less than that number because I was trying to contribute 4K to a traditional this year to offset some taxes and it told me that I was above the income limit for a tax advantage. Maybe there is a difference between the tax advantage and eligibility. Does anyone know? We did not exceed 159K for our income.

alert mods    

bpd67 said:Venturion said:No sweat. Your eligibility to contribute to an IRA or ROTH IRA are not linked to your participation in a 401(k) plan. The IRA (or Roth) eligibility is linked solely to having income, being below certain thresholds for MAGI (101K for single and 159K for married joint), and a combined limit of 4K for both if you're under 50 and 5K for over 50. I'm remembering much of this from memory, so consult with your tax adviser and/or IRS for concrete answers.

I think it's less than that number because I was trying to contribute 4K to a traditional this year to offset some taxes and it told me that I was above the income limit for a tax advantage. Maybe there is a difference between the tax advantage and eligibility. Does anyone know? We did not exceed 159K for our income.

At your income level, a trip to a CPA might be prudent.

alert mods    

whatweworkfor said:bpd67 said:Venturion said:No sweat. Your eligibility to contribute to an IRA or ROTH IRA are not linked to your participation in a 401(k) plan. The IRA (or Roth) eligibility is linked solely to having income, being below certain thresholds for MAGI (101K for single and 159K for married joint), and a combined limit of 4K for both if you're under 50 and 5K for over 50. I'm remembering much of this from memory, so consult with your tax adviser and/or IRS for concrete answers.

I think it's less than that number because I was trying to contribute 4K to a traditional this year to offset some taxes and it told me that I was above the income limit for a tax advantage. Maybe there is a difference between the tax advantage and eligibility. Does anyone know? We did not exceed 159K for our income.


At your income level, a trip to a CPA might be prudent.


At what income level? I did not exceed 159K. Is there a limit that you can still contribute but can't get a tax break? That's what I'm asking.

alert mods    

bpd67 said:whatweworkfor said:bpd67 said:Venturion said:No sweat. Your eligibility to contribute to an IRA or ROTH IRA are not linked to your participation in a 401(k) plan. The IRA (or Roth) eligibility is linked solely to having income, being below certain thresholds for MAGI (101K for single and 159K for married joint), and a combined limit of 4K for both if you're under 50 and 5K for over 50. I'm remembering much of this from memory, so consult with your tax adviser and/or IRS for concrete answers.

I think it's less than that number because I was trying to contribute 4K to a traditional this year to offset some taxes and it told me that I was above the income limit for a tax advantage. Maybe there is a difference between the tax advantage and eligibility. Does anyone know? We did not exceed 159K for our income.


At your income level, a trip to a CPA might be prudent.


At what income level? I did not exceed 159K. Is there a limit that you can still contribute but can't get a tax break? That's what I'm asking.

There is no limit. you can contribute without getting tax breaks. you have to file a form with irs. see http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/topic.php?catid=52&threadid=628604 for more info.

alert mods    

bpd67 said:whatweworkfor said:bpd67 said:Venturion said:No sweat. Your eligibility to contribute to an IRA or ROTH IRA are not linked to your participation in a 401(k) plan. The IRA (or Roth) eligibility is linked solely to having income, being below certain thresholds for MAGI (101K for single and 159K for married joint), and a combined limit of 4K for both if you're under 50 and 5K for over 50. I'm remembering much of this from memory, so consult with your tax adviser and/or IRS for concrete answers.

I think it's less than that number because I was trying to contribute 4K to a traditional this year to offset some taxes and it told me that I was above the income limit for a tax advantage. Maybe there is a difference between the tax advantage and eligibility. Does anyone know? We did not exceed 159K for our income.


At your income level, a trip to a CPA might be prudent.


At what income level? I did not exceed 159K. Is there a limit that you can still contribute but can't get a tax break? That's what I'm asking.

There is no limit. you can contribute without getting tax breaks. you have to file a form with irs. see http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/topic.php?catid=52&threadid=628604 for more info.

alert mods    

Thank OP!@

It has no limitations I think.

alert mods    

cps1584 said:

There is no limit. you can contribute without getting tax breaks. you have to file a form with irs. see http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/topic.php?catid=52&threadid=628604 for more info.

I don't think it's correct. There is a limitation above which the IRA contributions are not allowed.
For 2007 that's $156K for married,$99K for single.

I'd start with IRS Publication 17 to find the answers.

alert mods    

gkl said:cps1584 said:

There is no limit. you can contribute without getting tax breaks. you have to file a form with irs. see http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/topic.php?catid=52&threadid=628604 for more info.


I don't think it's correct. There is a limitation above which the IRA contributions are not allowed.


Those limits are for tax deduction purposes NOT contributions.

Try Here

Who Can Set Up a Traditional IRA?
You can set up and make contributions to a traditional IRA if:
*
You (or, if you file a joint return, your spouse) received taxable compensation during the year, and
*
You were not age 70½ by the end of the year.

You can have a traditional IRA whether or not you are covered by any other retirement plan. However, you may not be able to deduct all of your contributions if you or your spouse is covered by an employer retirement plan. See How Much Can You Deduct, later.

alert mods    

bpd67 said:whatweworkfor said:bpd67 said:Venturion said:No sweat. Your eligibility to contribute to an IRA or ROTH IRA are not linked to your participation in a 401(k) plan. The IRA (or Roth) eligibility is linked solely to having income, being below certain thresholds for MAGI (101K for single and 159K for married joint), and a combined limit of 4K for both if you're under 50 and 5K for over 50. I'm remembering much of this from memory, so consult with your tax adviser and/or IRS for concrete answers.

I think it's less than that number because I was trying to contribute 4K to a traditional this year to offset some taxes and it told me that I was above the income limit for a tax advantage. Maybe there is a difference between the tax advantage and eligibility. Does anyone know? We did not exceed 159K for our income.


At your income level, a trip to a CPA might be prudent.


At what income level? I did not exceed 159K. Is there a limit that you can still contribute but can't get a tax break? That's what I'm asking.


So apparently since we both have 401K's, (she switched jobs mid-year and can't start new plan until 08), you can only get a tax break up to 103K AGI, I knew I kept seeing that number. So contributing to a traditional will not give me a tax break, might as well contribute to the Roth then.

alert mods    

Table 17-3 of IRS Publication 17 indicates limits for eligibility of Roth IRA contributions - that's on page 127 of 298 in PDF version.

Apparently, Traditional IRA doesn't have those limitations for contributions, but has similar limits of MAGI to determine if the amount would be deductible.

alert mods    

gkl said:Apparently, Traditional IRA doesn't have those limitations for contributions, but has similar limits of MAGI to determine if the amount would be deductible.Only if you or your spouse actively participates in an employer plan.

alert mods    

Any advantage of contributing to trad IRA vs. roth IRA in this scenario:

I want to contribute $5,000 to an IRA in my name.
I have zero income and my spouse is under the MAGI limit for deductibility of trad IRA. (she has a 401k)
So should I invest $5,000 (after tax money) in a trad IRA which is deductible and I would see a net gain of $1250 in 2007 taxes (assuming 25% tax bracket) but I would have to pay tax upon withdrawing at retirement age
Or should I invest the $5,000 in a Roth IRA which nets me no tax break for 2007 but would grow tax free?

I'm not sure which way to go. Part of me likes the idea of seeing $1250 extra in my pocket this year and part of me wants to be able to withdraw at retirement tax-free.
I guess I could go the trad IRA route and convert to a Roth later on. Any advantage to that?
Or should I split the $5k up? Help...

alert mods    

Southpaw75 said:So should I invest $5,000 (after tax money) in a trad IRA which is deductible and I would see a net gain of $1250 in 2007 taxes (assuming 25% tax bracket) but I would have to pay tax upon withdrawing at retirement age
Or should I invest the $5,000 in a Roth IRA which nets me no tax break for 2007 but would grow tax free?
(If you invested $5000 in a traditional IRA and got a deduction, it wouldn't be after-tax money anymore.)

This is a very fundamental question. There are several factors to consider, but the most important one is what you think is going to happen to your tax rate in the future. I know that nobody knows what the future holds, either for them personally or for our tax policy, but whatever you do, you're really betting on that.

Are you in the 25% bracket now because you're temporarily unemployed (or medium-term, to stay home with kids, for example)? Do you expect to go up to the 35% bracket soon and stay there? If so, you probably want a Roth IRA, so that your money is taxed at today's 25% instead. Conversely, are you right at the peak of your earning power now, and expect to be in the 15% bracket in retirement? In that case, you probably want the traditional IRA, because it's worth paying 15% later to get a 25% deduction today.

If you think you're staying at the same rate, or not changing much, I would go with the Roth for a number of reasons (ability to withdraw your contributions without penalty, ability to let the money sit instead of having to take withdrawals when you turn 70 1/2, ability to effectively contribute more since $5000 after tax is "really" more money than $5000 on which you'll have to pay tax later...). But if you are confident you'll ever be in a lower tax bracket, even temporarily, I would go with the traditional and try to convert later.

 Close

Sign Me In
Nickname: 
Password: 
Remember My Login Information:

Forget your login information?

Not Already A Member?
Sign Up Now!



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.


  • © 1999-2008
  • Message Board Statistics RSS Feed Information