I've read quite a few articles on the debate between contributing to retirement pre-tax or post-tax. It seems to me that on any sort of financial forum, the general consensus is Roth is better; however, as I mentioned last week DH and I are reading Smart Couples Finish Rich, and in the retirement chapter he talks about how to contribute 10% without reducing your income 10%. I am presently contributing 10% to a Roth (with 6% company match). After reading it, I played with my retirement contributions (my company offers traditional 401(k) as well as a Roth 401(k)) and I calculated that I could contribute 10% to my traditional 401k AND 3% to my Roth still without spending more money.
I realize I will pay taxes on the pre-tax contributions when they are distributed but I guess that's where it gets a little too complex for me. He had a chart in the book but it was very biased because it illustrated what you would have in a traditional vs roth account at retirment age at a variety of return rates -- what it did not show, however, is how much of the traditional would be left after taxes. Very misleading if you ask me. Anyway I know how most of you feel about Bach and that's not really what I wanted to ask about. My question is, the recommendation is always to try to contribute 15-20% to retirement. I can't afford to contribute more than we already are at this point (until debt is repaid), so is it better to contribute 10% entirely to a post-tax account or to contribute 13% to a mix or roth and traditional? Of course it would be an option to put it all in the traditional as well and at that point I might be up to 15%.
What would saving advice do?
I realize I will pay taxes on the pre-tax contributions when they are distributed but I guess that's where it gets a little too complex for me. He had a chart in the book but it was very biased because it illustrated what you would have in a traditional vs roth account at retirment age at a variety of return rates -- what it did not show, however, is how much of the traditional would be left after taxes. Very misleading if you ask me. Anyway I know how most of you feel about Bach and that's not really what I wanted to ask about. My question is, the recommendation is always to try to contribute 15-20% to retirement. I can't afford to contribute more than we already are at this point (until debt is repaid), so is it better to contribute 10% entirely to a post-tax account or to contribute 13% to a mix or roth and traditional? Of course it would be an option to put it all in the traditional as well and at that point I might be up to 15%.
What would saving advice do?

I know, I know. I have time. I just feel like one of the best things we can do for our future is to put away a decent amount right now. My spouse and I both have life insurance (him $500k and me $250k) and I have disability as well. Its so amazing to me how much of a difference it can make to save even $5k/year when you're in your 20s compared to starting in your 30s though so its important to me to do this even though we do have other financial hurdles as well.
just take that calculator and mess around with the numbers to see if you can ever find a combination where the traditional version wins.
Comment