2006 inherited a IRA.I am not the spouse.Bank said to roll over and continue taking withdrawals.Is this true?

Question

The deceased was taking regular minumin withdrawals at the time. I am just a friend (not spouse). Bank told me to roll over money and continue taking minumin withdrawals. I am only 34. Has the regs changed? In 2005 and prior years you were unable to do this. Has the regs govering IRAs changed in 2006?

Answer 1

To roll it over into your name makes it a taxable event unless you are the spouse. Once the taxable event has happened and you claim this on your income taxes, the money becomes "Non Qualified" money, and you do not have to continue taking the distributions. Really bad advice from this bank. They want you to roll it over with them so they can make the commission again! I'd contact a reputable insurance company, and have them roll it over into an annuity, and let this money sit and grow tax deferred for years. This could be quite a nest egg when you get ready to retire. Don't do the annuity with the bank, or broker the interest tends to be lower because you have a middle man. Let me know if I can put you in touch with someone that can make this simple and right.

Answer 2

I am assuming that the IRA you inherited consists of CD's, other instruments held by the Bank as Administrator. If you continue to make withdrawals, you'll have to pay tax on the new income, unless the IRA was a Roth IRA (funded with after tax contributions).

I would recommend that you contact a broker (Schwab, Scott, Merrill Lynch, or any other discount firms), discuss your situation with their representative and find out what your options are as far as tax implications, keeping the account open and growing (accruing interest), open/ roll-over to your IRA account, etc. As a disinterested third party, the broker will be able to assist you without bias or self-interest.

The issue is too complicated to answer in a few paragraphs.

Answer 3

no remember if this is real or no longer approximately 2006 i discover the belief of phil freakibg Jackson speaking some participant (thus Dwayne wade ) or a team getting particular scientific care with the help of the league for the time of the playoffs truthfully hilarious and the top of irony and albeit hypocrisy.. The NBA has had this concern in the previous the place issues looked suspicious because of the fact it possible had alterior reasons and conflicts of activity in terms of needing a undeniable team or participant to prevail because of the fact it turn into financially constructive to the league. And interior the cases the place this got here approximately in the previous(all under david sterns watch i could desire to upload) very practically solely had to do (and benefited) phil Jackson's bulls and then for this reason his lakers! For him of each person to day it is so ridiculous after in certainty having a participant in Michael Jordan who turn into allowed to defensively rape people on one end of the court docket and then on the different if a participant a lot as blew air on him he turn into on the foul line.and then an identical element got here approximately with Kobe in l. a.