Re: 401K forced rollover?

Dave Dodson wrote:
> Of course, if you terminate employment in or after the year in which
> you attain age 55 but before you reach 59-1/2, you also lose something
> by rolling your 401(k) to an IRA.

Yes - there's an older thread that went through the pros and cons of the 
401(k) to IRA rollover.
My current favorite - When you convert from IRA to Roth IRA (and the 
income limit goes away in 2010) you may not separate the pre-Tax 
contributions from post tax. If you could do so, you can (and should) 
convert only post tax deposits, and therefore pay no tax upon 
conversion. The pro****tion of pretax money will only be bumped higher by 
rolling the 401(k) now. I may actually go the other way, transferring 
all my pretax IRA money to my 401(k), then convert remaining (post tax) 
money from IRA to Roth IRA. The cost and hassle will be worth the effort 
in the end.

Joe
www.blog.joetaxpayer.com

--------------------------------------
Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators
strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond.  For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM
THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on
the
Newsgroup.