The Roth Conversion Window That Can Disappear After Retirement

Retirement can create a brief period in which a household looks unusually poor on its tax return while remaining financially secure.

A couple may have millions of dollars invested, own real estate and receive a pension, yet report considerably less taxable income after their salaries stop. Social Security has not begun, and required minimum distributions have not started pulling money from traditional retirement accounts. For several years, the household may have greater control over how much income appears on its return than it will have at any other point in retirement.

That period can be an attractive time for Roth conversions. Money is transferred from a traditional IRA or eligible workplace account to a Roth account, and the converted amount is generally treated as taxable income for that year. The immediate tax bill can be substantial, but future qualified Roth withdrawals are generally tax-free, and Roth IRAs do not require distributions during the original owner’s lifetime.

The strategy is often presented too simply. Retirees are told to convert enough to fill the 22% bracket, avoid the 24% bracket or move a fixed amount such as $60,000 every year. None of those instructions can be applied without understanding the household’s income, deductions, state taxes, Medicare status and future retirement balances.

A Roth conversion is not automatically valuable because taxes are paid early. It works when the tax paid today is reasonable compared with the taxes and related costs likely to arise later.

Early Retirement Can Create a Valuable Tax Gap

Consider a married couple planning to retire at 59 and 62. During their working years, wages, bonuses and restricted-stock compensation may place them in relatively high tax brackets. Once employment ends, those income sources disappear.

The couple may still receive pension payments, dividends and rental income, but taxable income could fall substantially. Social Security might not begin until one spouse reaches 62 and the higher earner reaches 70. Required minimum distributions from traditional IRAs generally do not begin until age 73 under current law, although workplace-plan rules can differ in limited circumstances.

The years between retirement and those later income sources can become a conversion window. The couple can voluntarily recognize income by moving part of a traditional IRA or 401(k) into a Roth account. Instead of allowing future tax rules and mandatory distributions to determine the size of their taxable income, they decide how much income to create each year.

That control can be especially useful for households that have accumulated most of their savings in tax-deferred accounts. Traditional contributions provided deductions during the working years, but the government has not forgotten about the tax. Withdrawals and conversions generally bring that deferred income onto the tax return.

The question is not whether taxes will be paid. It is whether they will be paid gradually at manageable rates or later under less favorable circumstances.

Filling a Tax Bracket Is Only the Beginning

For married couples filing jointly in 2026, the federal 22% bracket begins after the lower brackets have been used and extends to a specified taxable-income ceiling. The 24% rate applies above that level, with higher brackets following as income rises. Taxable income is calculated after deductions, so a household cannot determine conversion room by looking only at gross income.

Suppose a retired couple receives $60,000 from a pension and $20,000 of taxable investment and rental income. After deductions, the household may have room to convert a meaningful amount while remaining within the 22% bracket.

That does not prove the couple should use every available dollar of bracket space. A conversion can affect capital-gains taxation, deductions, health-insurance subsidies and state income taxes. Once the couple is enrolled in Medicare, it can also increase future Part B and Part D premiums.

The decision should be based on the conversion’s total marginal cost, not merely the federal bracket printed on the tax table.

A dollar converted at a nominal 22% federal rate may also trigger state tax and cause more investment income to become taxable. The effective cost could therefore be higher than 22%. Conversely, a couple living in a state with no personal income tax and few secondary effects may find a larger conversion more attractive.

The 24% bracket should not be treated as a forbidden zone. The difference between 22% and 24% is two percentage points, while a future required distribution could push income into the 32% or 35% bracket. Paying 24% today may be entirely rational when it reduces income that would otherwise be taxed more heavily later.

Tax brackets should inform the strategy, not replace it.

Required Distributions Can Change the Retirement Tax Picture

A household with a large traditional retirement balance may appear to have modest income during its early retirement years. That can change quickly when required minimum distributions begin.

The IRS generally requires owners of traditional IRAs, SEP IRAs and SIMPLE IRAs to begin annual distributions at age 73. Certain workplace plans may permit a participant who is still employed to delay distributions until retirement, unless the person owns more than 5% of the sponsoring business.

The required amount is calculated using the prior year-end account balance and an IRS life-expectancy factor. A large balance creates a large distribution, even when the retiree does not need the money for spending.

Suppose a couple enters retirement with $1.6 million in tax-deferred accounts and continues contributing for several more years. If the investments grow substantially before age 73, required distributions may arrive alongside Social Security, pension income, dividends and rental profits.

A conversion completed earlier reduces the balance that will later be subject to required distributions. It also moves future growth into an account that does not impose lifetime RMDs on the original Roth IRA owner.

This can improve tax flexibility, but it does not make the Roth money permanently exempt from all distribution rules. Many nonspouse beneficiaries must empty inherited retirement accounts within 10 years, even when the inherited account is a Roth. The withdrawals may be tax-free when the requirements for qualified Roth treatment have been satisfied, but the account cannot necessarily remain invested for the heir’s lifetime.

Roth conversions can still improve a legacy plan. Heirs may inherit an account with less income-tax exposure, and the original owner can use traditional and Roth assets selectively throughout retirement. The benefit should be described accurately rather than promoted as a way to avoid every future distribution requirement.

Social Security Can Narrow the Opportunity

Social Security may begin as early as 62, although delaying can increase the monthly benefit until age 70. Once payments begin, they add another income source that can reduce available conversion room.

Social Security is not always fully taxable, but up to 85% of benefits can be included in taxable income depending on the household’s other income. A Roth conversion can cause a larger portion of the benefit to become taxable, creating a higher effective marginal rate than the nominal tax bracket suggests.

This is one reason conversions are often attractive before Social Security begins. The household can create taxable income without simultaneously pulling more of the benefit into taxation.

Delaying Social Security can therefore support two objectives at once. It can increase the future monthly benefit and preserve several years in which larger conversions may be completed. The household must have enough savings or other income to fund spending during the delay, and the claiming decision still depends on health, longevity and survivor needs.

A conversion strategy should not determine the Social Security decision by itself. The two decisions should be modeled together.

For a couple expecting to spend $160,000 or $180,000 annually before Social Security, the source of that spending becomes critical. Fully taxable traditional-account withdrawals consume bracket space. Qualified Roth withdrawals generally do not. Selling investments from a taxable brokerage account may create only a capital gain rather than taxable income equal to the entire sale proceeds.

The composition of the portfolio can matter as much as its total size.

Medicare Adds Another Tax-Like Cost

Once retirees enroll in Medicare, higher income can increase Part B and Part D premiums through the income-related monthly adjustment amount, commonly known as IRMAA.

For 2026, married couples filing jointly begin paying income-related surcharges when modified adjusted gross income from the relevant prior tax return exceeds $218,000. The first tier raises the monthly Part B premium above the standard $202.90 amount and adds a surcharge to the Part D premium. Higher income levels produce progressively larger charges.

Medicare generally uses tax information from two years earlier. A large conversion at 63, for example, could affect premiums at 65. A conversion completed after Medicare enrollment may influence premiums two years later.

This two-year lookback does not mean retirees should avoid every conversion that crosses an IRMAA threshold. The surcharge lasts for the applicable premium year rather than permanently increasing Medicare costs. Paying a temporary surcharge may be worthwhile when the conversion produces larger long-term tax savings.

The effect should still be included in the calculation. A conversion that appears to cost 22% in federal tax may also create thousands of dollars in additional Medicare premiums. For a married couple, the surcharge applies to each spouse enrolled in Medicare, which can magnify the household impact.

A retirement or reduction in work income may qualify as a life-changing event that allows the beneficiary to ask Social Security to reconsider an IRMAA determination using more recent income information. A voluntary Roth conversion generally does not receive the same favorable treatment merely because it was part of a tax strategy. Social Security identifies events such as work stoppage, work reduction, marriage, divorce and the death of a spouse as potential grounds for requesting an adjustment.

The distinction reinforces the need to plan conversions before submitting them rather than attempting to reverse the premium consequences afterward.

Market Declines Can Create Conversion Opportunities

A Roth conversion is taxed on the value transferred at the time of conversion. When markets decline, the same number of shares may be converted at a lower taxable value.

Suppose an investor wants to move 1,000 fund shares from a traditional IRA into a Roth. At $100 a share, the conversion creates $100,000 of taxable income. After a decline to $75, the same shares could be converted while recognizing $75,000.

If the investment later recovers inside the Roth, the rebound may occur in an account capable of producing tax-free qualified withdrawals.

This strategy is sometimes described as converting during a market dip. It can be effective when the conversion already fits the long-term tax plan, but it should not become a market-timing exercise. No one knows whether a decline is temporary or whether prices will fall further.

The tax is also due regardless of what happens afterward. Current law generally does not allow a completed Roth conversion to be recharacterized back into a traditional IRA merely because the investment continued to decline. A retiree should therefore avoid converting more than can be supported by available cash and the planned tax bracket.

Market conditions can improve the economics of a conversion. They should not create the strategy from nothing.

The Tax Bill Should Usually Come From Outside the IRA

A conversion does not create cash. It moves assets from one retirement account to another while generating taxable income.

Retirees who can pay the tax from a bank account or taxable brokerage assets preserve the full converted amount inside the Roth. Using part of the IRA distribution to cover withholding means less money reaches the Roth and may create an additional problem for someone younger than 59½.

Suppose $100,000 is removed from a traditional IRA, with $25,000 withheld for taxes and $75,000 deposited into the Roth. The household has paid tax on the full distribution but has moved only $75,000 into the tax-free account. If the owner is subject to the early-distribution penalty, the amount withheld rather than converted may also generate an additional cost unless an exception applies.

A household planning to retire at 59 should pay particular attention to the age at which retirement assets become accessible without the general 10% additional tax. The rules for workplace plans, IRAs and Roth conversion withdrawals are not identical, and the five-year rules attached to Roth accounts can create complications.

Maintaining sufficient after-tax savings before retirement gives the household more flexibility. Brokerage assets and cash can cover living expenses and conversion taxes while traditional retirement money moves into the Roth intact.

That liquidity is one reason a taxable account should not be treated as an inferior form of savings merely because it lacks the obvious tax benefits of a retirement plan.

A Large Portfolio Can Still Produce an Unsustainable Retirement

The financial examples behind conversion discussions often include impressive savings projections. A couple may have $575,000 today and expect to reach $3 million in 10 years by maximizing workplace plans, receiving employer matches, investing bonuses and assuming annual growth of 7% to 10%.

Such projections can be useful, but they should not be mistaken for promises.

Investment returns do not arrive steadily, and a 10-year period is short enough that actual results can differ substantially from a long-term average. A household planning to spend $160,000 a year must also consider whether the projected portfolio, pension, rental income and Social Security can support that lifestyle after taxes and inflation.

A $3 million account may sound enormous, but a $160,000 annual spending target represents more than 5% of the starting balance before taxes and before accounting for large irregular costs. Pension and Social Security income may reduce the portfolio burden later, but the years immediately after early retirement could require substantial withdrawals.

Roth conversions add another use of cash during the same period. The household may need to fund living expenses, health insurance and a conversion tax bill while salaries have stopped.

Tax optimization cannot rescue a retirement plan that is underfunded for its desired spending. The retirement-income projection must be established first. The conversion strategy is then layered onto a plan that already works under reasonable assumptions.

Backdoor Roth Contributions Require Careful Coordination

High earners who exceed the income limits for direct Roth IRA contributions may use a backdoor Roth strategy. The person makes a nondeductible traditional IRA contribution and then converts the amount to a Roth IRA.

The process can be simple when the taxpayer has no other pretax IRA balances. It becomes more complicated when traditional, SEP or SIMPLE IRAs already hold pretax money. The tax calculation generally considers those IRA balances together under the pro-rata rule, preventing the taxpayer from choosing to convert only the after-tax contribution.

Rolling eligible pretax IRA money into an employer plan may sometimes reduce the balance subject to the pro-rata calculation, provided the workplace plan accepts the rollover. The transaction should be completed carefully and documented on the appropriate tax forms.

A backdoor Roth contribution and a large retirement conversion are related but distinct strategies. The first is a method of making an annual Roth contribution despite income restrictions. The second is a deliberate transfer of existing tax-deferred wealth that can create a much larger tax bill.

Using the same word—conversion—for both transactions can obscure the difference.

Employer Plans May Offer Additional Roth Options

Some 401(k), 403(b) and governmental 457(b) plans permit in-plan Roth rollovers. When the plan includes a designated Roth account and allows the transaction, eligible pretax amounts can be converted within the same workplace plan.

Plans may also permit conversions of vested matching and nonelective employer contributions, along with other eligible balances. The availability of these features depends on the plan document; the tax code may allow a transaction that a particular employer plan does not offer.

After-tax contributions create another potential route. IRS rules may allow pretax amounts to be directed to a traditional IRA or eligible plan while after-tax amounts are directed to a Roth destination as part of a properly structured distribution.

These strategies can substantially increase the amount reaching Roth accounts, particularly for high-income employees. They also introduce administrative and tax-reporting complexity. A participant should understand whether the plan supports automatic conversions, in-service distributions and separate accounting for after-tax contributions before contributing money with a particular conversion strategy in mind.

The fact that an employer plans to add a Roth feature in 2026 does not establish how every contribution will be treated. The summary plan description and benefits department remain essential sources.

Traditional Contributions Can Still Be Valuable

Enthusiasm for Roth accounts sometimes leads workers to conclude that every new contribution should be Roth and every traditional balance should be converted immediately.

That approach ignores the value of tax deductions during high-income working years.

A physician or executive paying a 32% or 35% marginal federal rate may benefit significantly from traditional 401(k) contributions. If part of that money can later be converted or withdrawn at 22% or 24%, the household has created a favorable tax-rate spread.

The Roth decision should compare the rate avoided today with the rate expected when the money is converted or withdrawn. A worker who contributes to a Roth account while paying 35% may be prepaying tax at a higher rate than necessary.

Future rates are uncertain, and tax diversification has value. Holding traditional, Roth and taxable assets gives the household several sources from which to fund retirement. The objective is not to prove that one account type is universally superior. It is to avoid allowing nearly all retirement wealth to become subject to the same future tax treatment.

A blended contribution strategy may be appropriate when future rates are difficult to predict. Traditional contributions can reduce current taxes, while Roth and taxable savings create flexibility for later withdrawals and conversions.

California Can Change the Conversion Calculation

State taxes are particularly important for households planning to move.

A conversion completed while living in California may be subject to the state’s income tax. The same conversion completed after establishing residency in a state without a personal income tax could cost materially less.

That does not mean someone can simply claim a new state on a tax return while maintaining the same home and life elsewhere. Residency and domicile depend on facts such as housing, time spent in the state, driver’s licenses, voter registration and personal connections.

A planned relocation can nevertheless influence the conversion timeline. A household expecting to leave a high-tax state may delay part of the strategy until the move is complete. Someone planning to relocate into a higher-tax state may have an incentive to convert earlier.

State taxation should be considered alongside federal brackets, Medicare premiums and the investment opportunity cost of paying the tax. A conversion plan based solely on the federal return may overlook a substantial part of the cost.

Asset Location Supports the Broader Tax Strategy

Roth conversions address the tax character of an account. Asset location considers which investments belong inside each account type.

Tax-efficient stock index funds may work well in taxable brokerage accounts because qualified dividends and long-term capital gains can receive favorable federal treatment. Bonds and other investments producing ordinary income may be more efficient in tax-deferred accounts. Assets with the greatest expected growth may benefit from Roth placement because qualified future gains can escape tax.

These are guidelines rather than fixed rules. The household’s risk allocation should remain coherent across all accounts, and the need for liquidity may justify holding stable assets in a taxable account even when another placement would appear more tax-efficient.

A concentrated stock position created by employer shares or restricted-stock awards requires special care. Selling may generate capital gains, but allowing one company to dominate the portfolio can place the retirement plan at unnecessary risk.

Tax-loss harvesting, charitable gifts and gradual sales may help diversify the position. Inherited taxable assets may receive a basis adjustment under current law, while traditional retirement accounts generally do not. Legacy goals should therefore consider the type of asset being left to heirs, not merely the account balance.

A Conversion Plan Should Be Recalculated Every Year

A multiyear Roth strategy should not be placed on autopilot.

Pension income may change, a rental property may produce an unexpected gain or loss, and capital gains could rise after a business or investment sale. Tax law, Medicare thresholds and household spending can also change.

The calculation should be updated before year-end using actual income and projected deductions. Conversions can often be completed in stages rather than through one large transaction. A household might convert part of the intended amount early in the year and complete the remainder after income becomes clearer.

Spreading conversions across several years can reduce the risk of unintentionally entering an unfavorable bracket. It also allows the household to respond to market declines and changing spending needs.

The goal is not to convert the largest amount possible. It is to convert the amount that improves expected after-tax wealth without creating an unacceptable current cost.

The Best Strategy Is Not Always the Lowest Lifetime Tax Bill

Tax minimization is an important objective, but it is not the only one.

A household may choose to pay slightly more lifetime tax in exchange for simpler finances, greater liquidity or a larger guaranteed-income base. Someone retiring early may preserve taxable assets for health insurance and living expenses rather than using all available cash to fund conversion taxes.

Another household may complete larger conversions because future RMDs are projected to be substantial and heirs are likely to inherit the accounts during their own high-income years.

The decision should also account for uncertainty. Future tax rates, investment returns, longevity and spending cannot be known. A strategy that produces the lowest tax bill under one projection may perform poorly when the assumptions change.

Tax diversification provides resilience. Traditional accounts offer deferred taxation, Roth accounts offer potential tax-free qualified withdrawals, and brokerage accounts provide flexible access with capital-gains treatment. A household holding all three can adapt more easily than one dependent on a single account type.

The Opportunity Is Valuable Because It Does Not Last

The most attractive Roth conversion years often begin when employment income stops and end when Social Security and required distributions fill the tax return.

That window may last a decade for one household and only a few years for another. A pension, rental income, consulting work or an early Social Security claim can narrow it. Medicare surcharges can increase the cost, while a move to a lower-tax state may improve the opportunity.

A retiree should not convert simply because a bracket has unused space. The household must first determine whether the retirement plan can support its spending, whether cash is available to pay the tax and whether the future traditional-account balance is likely to create a genuine problem.

When those conditions are present, deliberate conversions can reduce future required distributions, improve withdrawal flexibility and create a more tax-efficient inheritance. When they are absent, paying tax early may accomplish little beyond shrinking the assets available today.

The strongest Roth strategy is rarely one dramatic transaction. It is a series of annual decisions made during the years when the retiree still controls the timing and amount of taxable income.

Once Social Security, pensions and required distributions are all arriving, that control may be difficult to recover.

Intended for educational purposes only. Opinions expressed are not intended as investment advice or to predict future performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Neither the information presented, nor any opinion expressed constitutes a solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. Consult your financial professional before making any investment decisions. Opinions expressed are subject to change without notice.

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES:

• Investment Advisory and Financial Planning Services are offered through Pure Financial Advisors, LLC. A Registered Investment Advisor.

• Pure Financial Advisors, LLC. does not offer tax or legal advice. Consult with a tax advisor or attorney regarding specific situations.

• Opinions expressed are subject to change without notice and are not intended as investment advice or to predict future performance.

• Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal. No investment strategy can guarantee a profit or protect against loss in periods of declining values.

• All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however, we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy.

• Intended for educational purposes only and are not intended as individualized advice or a guarantee that you will achieve a desired result. Before implementing any strategies discussed you should consult your tax and financial advisors.