A. You can't contribute to a traditional IRA after age 70 1/2 but you can contribute to a Roth IRA after that age if you are still working for income. You’re still working, so you can still make contributions. The contribution limit for 2013 is $5,500 plus an additional $1,000 for those over age 50.
If it were possible to contribute to a traditional IRA your tax deductible contribution would work to offset a portion of the taxable income from your required minimum distribution. But they figured that out in Washington, so you can’t. Contributing to a Roth IRA won’t reduce your income tax bill, but it would start to build an account you can withdraw from in the future without creating what the IRS calls a "taxable event." That would give you more flexibility vis-à-vis your taxable income in future years since withdrawals are tax-free.
Q. If you had several CD's maturing and no need of the money in the foreseeable
future, which would you choose? A 5-year CD at 2.15 percent or a 7-year CD at 2.70 percent? I am tempted to go out 7 years, as interest rates don't seem likely to be going up any time
soon, but I would like your thoughts on which you would choose. —J.F., San Antonio, TX
A. Go for the 7-year CD. One way to look at this is to ask how much you are being paid in each of the two additional years— years six and seven. If you total the expected interest for the 2.70 percent 7-year CD and subtract the 2.15 percent interest on the 5-year CD, it turns out that you are, in effect, earning at about a 4.075 percent interest rate in each of the last two years. Not bad.
This is based on measuring what economists would call your “incremental return” when you add two years to the maturity of the CD. While the additional yield is spread out over 7 years, you would not get it without committing the additional two years. So your effective yield on those added years is materially higher.
Q. After reading a recent column about home mortgages, my wife and I have a question. We have a two family house that we don’t live in. It is currently valued at about $400,000 and we owe less than $150,000 on it at 6 percent, with 23 years remaining. We also own our one family home valued at $425,000 with a mortgage balance of $195,000. We refinanced this house two years ago at 4.25 percent. I am looking to refinance the two family investment home at about 3.75 percent but my wife suggests we just pay it off and have no mortgage.
We are both in our sixties and can afford to take the money out of savings without touching any IRA account money. Based on current market conditions would it be prudent for us to leave the money in investments or take it out and pay the house off? —R.K., by email
A. Since you have tax-deferred accounts and can pay the $150,000 mortgage with cash from other investment accounts, paying off the mortgage is a good choice. It will save you $9,000 a year in interest costs (it will also increase your taxable income by that much) and you'd need a lot more than $150,000 to earn $9,000 a year in any other investment.
Doing this is particularly good for someone your age. If you are considering retiring, you have to be thinking about what you can do to increase the income from your savings. Significantly, many people are looking for real estate properties that they can buy for cash, simply because they will generate a net yield they would not be able to earn elsewhere.
You might also investigate yet another refinancing of your own home mortgage since you might knock another 0.75 percent off the rate.
Filed Under: Government, Taxes & Other Disasters