There's probably a way to do this that I'm missing so thought I'd ask.
I've been playing with the Roth conversion optimization and PRC-O gives me a really high recommendation to convert this year. It does make sense because the rationale is to convert to the top of the 24% bracket. But let's say I don't really want to pay that much in taxes this year and choose to convert a smaller number, say $100K. Can I enter this number somewhere as my intended conversion for 2024 and see what it does to the model going forward?
Thanks for any guidance.
Go to Income, pick an employment income stream and enter a value for a personal contribution to a Roth.
Then go to the Scheduled Withdrawal Table under Financial Assets -Management and enter a withdrawal of the same amount from your tax deferred.
Hi Richard - thank you for your suggestion. I just tried entering $100k in the two areas you suggested but it doesn't quite seem to do what I expected. Now, PRC simply tells me that the optimum conversion for 2024 = (Amount suggested before) - $100K. What I was hoping for was sort of a *manual* override feature where PRC would use the number I gave it for 2024 and then project out future years. Ideally, if there is a way to enter the intended Roth conversions manually for multiple years in the spreadsheet, it would be nice.
I didn't explain fully. On the Analysis - Roth Conversions tab, you have to tell it No Conversions for the year in question, otherwise that is over-riding your manual entry.
@ricke Thank you for taking the time to explain all the steps, I'm still at relatively newbie level.
I just tried this and understand the mechanism better now, and the numbers make more sense. This method still feels like a "workaround" more than an official workflow since it's not being classified as a real Roth conversion on the Tabular Projections->Expenses->AGI Detail->Roth conversions.
I'm going to enter a feedback item to provide text boxes in the Roth conversions area under each row. That way, users can compare the effects of what they actually intend to convert versus what the model says is the fully optimized version. I'm probably missing some nuances here but at least Stuart & team can consider it.
Thanks again!