Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Have a question about your personal investments? No matter how simple or complex, you can ask it here.
Post Reply
stocknoob4111
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:52 pm

Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by stocknoob4111 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:20 pm

As a 43 year old (soon to turn 44) I am debating having just 100% equities in my 401k. My reasoning is that I do not plan to withdraw anything from my 401k until the required distributions when I turn 70. That is over 26 years away so why not take 100% equity risk now and then I can rebalance into bonds gradually when I get within a 10 year horizon say starting at age 60.

My core reasoning for not having bonds in a 401k is that you can't withdraw money from that account without severe penalties anyway so it's virtually guaranteed I will never withdraw it before full retirement age.

In my taxable I have about 30% of my portfolio in bonds. I also have 8 months of expenses in a savings account. The logic in having part of my portfolio in bonds is IF in the RARE CASE I need a sum of money greater than 8 months of emergency savings I at least have something liquid.

H-Town
Posts: 1278
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:08 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by H-Town » Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:25 pm

stocknoob4111 wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:20 pm
As a 43 year old (soon to turn 44) I am debating having just 100% equities in my 401k. My reasoning is that I do not plan to withdraw anything from my 401k until the required distributions when I turn 70. That is over 26 years away so why not take 100% equity risk now and then I can rebalance into bonds gradually when I get within a 10 year horizon say starting at age 60.

My core reasoning for not having bonds in a 401k is that you can't withdraw money from that account without severe penalties anyway so it's virtually guaranteed I will never withdraw it before full retirement age.

In my taxable I have about 30% of my portfolio in bonds. I also have 8 months of expenses in a savings account. The logic in having part of my portfolio in bonds is IF in the RARE CASE I need a sum of money greater than 8 months of emergency savings I at least have something liquid.
Why not having 8 months emergency in bonds in 401k and the same amount in index stock funds in taxable account? If you need to access your emergency funds, simply sell stock funds in taxable, and then exchange bond fund into stock fund in your 401k?

Advantages:
1. Tax on gain will be 15% long-term cap gain, rather than top marginal bracket for interest income in saving accounts. Less tax paid, more money in your pocket.
2. Yield & growth on bonds are much better than interest income from saving accounts. You'll end up with bigger portfolio.

User avatar
whodidntante
Posts: 4202
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:11 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by whodidntante » Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:26 pm

I can tell you the reason that I have bonds in my 401k. I do it for tax efficiency. My taxable accounts are 100% stocks.

onourway
Posts: 1295
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by onourway » Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:27 pm

Did anyone mention tax efficiency yet?

:D

aristotelian
Posts: 4800
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:05 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by aristotelian » Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:31 pm

Your premise about penalties for early withdrawals is incorrect. You can roll it to Traditional IRA and then convert the Traditional IRA to Roth. Do a search for "Roth conversion ladder" and you will see.

I am shifting toward bonds in taxable for the opposite reason. I anticipate early retirement and claiming SS at 70, with 15+ years of no other taxable income. Therefore, the 401k is almost the same as Roth in terms of growth being essentially tax free. I want to maximize tax free growth, so I want stocks in 401k and Roth as much as possible.

SimplicityNow
Posts: 477
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:31 am

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by SimplicityNow » Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:36 pm

stocknoob4111 wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:20 pm
As a 43 year old (soon to turn 44) I am debating having just 100% equities in my 401k. My reasoning is that I do not plan to withdraw anything from my 401k until the required distributions when I turn 70. That is over 26 years away so why not take 100% equity risk now and then I can rebalance into bonds gradually when I get within a 10 year horizon say starting at age 60. That's a great plan but what happens if right before your 10 year horizon starts, the stock market takes a 50% dive? Are you going to start selling off your stocks which have lost half their value to buy bonds? That is the time you should be buying stocks.

My core reasoning for not having bonds in a 401k is that you can't withdraw money from that account without severe penalties anyway so it's virtually guaranteed I will never withdraw it before full retirement age. There are no virtual guarantees. Life happens. People get divorced, children get seriously ill. Never say never.

In my taxable I have about 30% of my portfolio in bonds. I also have 8 months of expenses in a savings account. The logic in having part of my portfolio in bonds is IF in the RARE CASE I need a sum of money greater than 8 months of emergency savings I at least have something liquid.Rare cases happen more then you think. In addition, bonds are better off for the most part in tax deferred accounts like your 401k. In a taxable account they produce dividends that are taxed at your marginal tax rate. A good tax efficient stock mutual fund mostly produces qualified dividends which are taxed at the capital gains rate which is usually lower.

stocknoob4111
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:52 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by stocknoob4111 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:22 pm

The tax efficiency reason does make sense to me but on another forum there was a debate with counter arguments stating that it's more beneficial to have equities in 401k due to taxes on distributions (dividends/cap gains) that can wipe out tax savings especially short term cap gains. But I reckon that many of the passive funds with low turnover will not have such issues.

Related question - I see VBTLX has 64% allocation in US Treasuries, isn't this tax exempt at the state level? So in my situation (I live in California) can I deduct 64% off the interest dividends from this fund on my state taxes? If so, it reduces tax liability quite a bit as CA taxes are 9.3%.

stocknoob4111
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:52 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by stocknoob4111 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:52 pm

This is the response I received from another investor:

If you put stocks in taxable accounts and bonds in qualified accounts, over the years you will pay a lot of taxes on the stock returns. That will very significantly reduce the growth of those stock accounts. Stocks in a qualified account will grow much faster and take advantage of the power of compounding. All of my advisors have recommended that approach. In addition to the growth, most of us have lower tax rates in retirement than we had when we worked.

onourway
Posts: 1295
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by onourway » Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:59 pm

stocknoob4111 wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:52 pm
This is the response I received from another investor:

If you put stocks in taxable accounts and bonds in qualified accounts, over the years you will pay a lot of taxes on the stock returns. That will very significantly reduce the growth of those stock accounts. Stocks in a qualified account will grow much faster and take advantage of the power of compounding. All of my advisors have recommended that approach. In addition to the growth, most of us have lower tax rates in retirement than we had when we worked.
Sure, that's true if you follow the typical advisor plan of regularly exchanging funds. In that case, both stocks and bonds are tax-inefficient. What we suggest here is that you hold only the most tax efficient funds in your taxable account - this typically means a Total Market Index fund - and you hold for the long term. When you need to sell, you sell specific lots of stocks, and sell the ones that have the smallest gains, or better yet, a loss first, thereby sharing the pain with the government who allows you to deduct such losses on your taxes. If you manage your tax liability well, you may never pay any taxes at all on most of your holdings in your taxable account.

When you have bonds in taxable, they generate yearly dividends that are taxed at your current income tax rate. You have no control over when to pay this tax - and - as your friend says - most of us have lower tax rates in retirement - which is why we don't want to pay income tax rates on our taxable investments while working!

stocknoob4111
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:52 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by stocknoob4111 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:37 pm

thanks that does make sense. However, I already have 100% equities in my 401k from past several years of contributing. I never did any allocation to anything else in the past. How should I proceed from this point? Should I:

a) Sell all my equities and convert everything into bonds? My 401k holdings are 25% of my total taxable+tax exempt portfolio
b) Keep the existing equities and change contributions from this point forward to 100% bonds (I contribute the max to my 401k).

I am a bit averse to selling my equities in the 401k as those were acquired a few years ago and the cost basis of those funds are quite low.

onourway
Posts: 1295
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by onourway » Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:44 pm

stocknoob4111 wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:37 pm
thanks that does make sense. However, I already have 100% equities in my 401k from past several years of contributing. I never did any allocation to anything else in the past. How should I proceed from this point? Should I:

a) Sell all my equities and convert everything into bonds? My 401k holdings are 25% of my total taxable+tax exempt portfolio
b) Keep the existing equities and change contributions from this point forward to 100% bonds (I contribute the max to my 401k).

I am a bit averse to selling my equities in the 401k as those were acquired a few years ago and the cost basis of those funds are quite low.
It would be easier for us to help if you laid out your entire portfolio as per the sticky at the top of this forum.

Do you have a desired asset allocation? What is it now vs. what you would like?

There is no tax liability to changing allocations in your 401k. It should happen as part of your annual re-balancing. You are 'taking gains' so to speak, by selling assets that have performed well recently.

stocknoob4111
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:52 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by stocknoob4111 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:17 pm

onourway wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:44 pm
It would be easier for us to help if you laid out your entire portfolio as per the sticky at the top of this forum.
Sure, here it is:

Emergency funds: 8 months expenses in Savings account earning 1.4%
Debt: 21k car loan balance @ 0% (4 yrs left), no other debts or liabilities
Tax Filing Status: Single
Tax Rate: 24% Federal, 9.3% State (2018 rates)
State of Residence: CA
Age: 43 (almost 44)
Desired Asset allocation: 65% stocks / 35% bonds (not entirely sure if I should do 75/25, 70/30 or 65/35 still debating)
Desired International allocation: 20% of stocks (this includes the 65% above, so 45% - domestic, 20% - intl)

Current Breakdown:
Taxable: S&P Index Fund (VOO) - 41.93%, International Fund (VTIAX) - 21.31%, Bond Fund (VBTLX) - 36.7%
Tax Deferred: Domestic Equities (Various) - 99.5%, International Equities (ODVIX) - 0.17%, Bond Funds (JCBUX) - 0.30%
Current Tax Deferred contribution elections - 40%: FUSVX, 20%: ODVIX, 30%: JCBUX
Annual contributions: Max 18,500 for 2018
Current Balances: Taxable - $325k, Tax Deferred - $105k

Tickers - FUSVX: Fidelity S&P 500 Index, ODVIX - Oppenheimer Developing markets fund, JCBUX - JP Morgan Bond Fund

Note - I just changed my elections to International and Bonds in my 401k hence the negligible amounts.

Nate79
Posts: 3604
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: Delaware

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by Nate79 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:54 pm

I think it is just fine to have a retirement account asset allocation, where if you are 20+ years from retirement and plan to just leave it alone then 100% stocks is fine. Depending on how the market is going 5-10 years from retirement you could increase the bonds if you want to plan on a stock/bond allocation target with some bonds as a safety net. But you could decide to enter retirement with 100% stocks. Many people are 100% stocks from accumulation thru retirement. Just depends on your tolerance level for market fluctuations.

JBTX
Posts: 4109
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:46 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by JBTX » Thu Jan 18, 2018 8:12 pm

100% stocks at that age seems fairly aggressive. Would you be able to withstand a 50-60% drop and it taking 10-20 years to recover? That is not an implausible scenario. Also going 100% stock when the market is at all time highs and valuations are at highs seems a bit imprudent.

As to having emergency bond funds in 401k and all stocks in taxable, that can theoretically work, as long as you have at least twice as much in the taxable account as you need as Emergency funds. If the market tanks 50% you still need to have enough to cover your emergency funds. You are more likely to need access to emergency funds when the markets are in the toilet which is often during a recession. I’m not crazy about the idea of emergency funds in taxable for that reason.

As to bonds being in 401k and stocks in taxable for taxable for tax efficiency, it depends on the relative tax rates vs growth rates. If tax rates are twice as much for bonds but stock taxable gains are twice as much as bonds in theory it would be a push. If you are willing to hold very tax efficient funds for a very long time and liquidate them in years where you cap gains rate is low and do tax loss harvesting then stocks in taxable may have an edge.

onourway
Posts: 1295
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by onourway » Thu Jan 18, 2018 9:41 pm

stocknoob4111 wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:17 pm
onourway wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:44 pm
It would be easier for us to help if you laid out your entire portfolio as per the sticky at the top of this forum.
Sure, here it is:

Emergency funds: 8 months expenses in Savings account earning 1.4%
Debt: 21k car loan balance @ 0% (4 yrs left), no other debts or liabilities
Tax Filing Status: Single
Tax Rate: 24% Federal, 9.3% State (2018 rates)
State of Residence: CA
Age: 43 (almost 44)
Desired Asset allocation: 65% stocks / 35% bonds (not entirely sure if I should do 75/25, 70/30 or 65/35 still debating)
Desired International allocation: 20% of stocks (this includes the 65% above, so 45% - domestic, 20% - intl)

Current Breakdown:
Taxable: S&P Index Fund (VOO) - 41.93%, International Fund (VTIAX) - 21.31%, Bond Fund (VBTLX) - 36.7%
Tax Deferred: Domestic Equities (Various) - 99.5%, International Equities (ODVIX) - 0.17%, Bond Funds (JCBUX) - 0.30%
Current Tax Deferred contribution elections - 40%: FUSVX, 20%: ODVIX, 30%: JCBUX
Annual contributions: Max 18,500 for 2018
Current Balances: Taxable - $325k, Tax Deferred - $105k

Tickers - FUSVX: Fidelity S&P 500 Index, ODVIX - Oppenheimer Developing markets fund, JCBUX - JP Morgan Bond Fund

Note - I just changed my elections to International and Bonds in my 401k hence the negligible amounts.
So I get your current breakdown at 56% US stock, 16% International, and 28% Bond.

JCBUX is a reasonably good bond fund, so I think you'd have the right idea by basically converting your VBTLX holdings in taxable to equities and then converting your entire 401k holding to JCBUX.

Your final numbers would look like this:
Taxable:
VOO $236k
VTIAX $89k

401k:
JCBUX $105k

Asset Allocation:
US Stock: 55%
Int Stock: 21%
Bonds: 24%

If you want to start moving towards your 35% bond goal, continue buying 100% bond in your 401k until you reach that point. As your equities in taxable should generally grow faster than your bonds, you may need to add a bit more tax advantaged space by opening a Roth IRA where you can hold more bonds, and/or consider using Vanguard's California Intermediate Term Tax Exempt and/or Intermediate Term Tax Exempt to add a bit more bonds in taxable without the tax cost.

Your current tax drag on VBTLX is your tax rate of 33%. Based on the distributions reported for that fund last year, on ~$3000 of dividends, you lose just over $1000 of that to tax. By moving those bonds to your 401k you keep that entire $1000. The California Tax Exempt fund would yield approximately the same, if not a bit better, while also getting rid of the tax drag. However there is a fair bit more risk in moving to a single-state municipal fund vs. the wide diversity you get from the Total Bond Fund.

stocknoob4111
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:52 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by stocknoob4111 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:09 pm

onourway wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 9:41 pm
Your final numbers would look like this:
Taxable:
VOO $236k
VTIAX $89k

401k:
JCBUX $105k

Asset Allocation:
US Stock: 55%
Int Stock: 21%
Bonds: 24%
Thanks! appreciate the feedback! I will look into this more carefully :sharebeer

User avatar
grabiner
Advisory Board
Posts: 22908
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Columbia, MD

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by grabiner » Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:13 pm

stocknoob4111 wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:22 pm
Related question - I see VBTLX has 64% allocation in US Treasuries, isn't this tax exempt at the state level? So in my situation (I live in California) can I deduct 64% off the interest dividends from this fund on my state taxes? If so, it reduces tax liability quite a bit as CA taxes are 9.3%.
64% is the allocation to bonds guaranteed by the government, but this includes GNMAs which are subject to state tax.

And in CA, if a fund is not at least half in Treasuries (and Total Bond Market Index isn't), you don't get any state tax exemption.
Wiki David Grabiner

User avatar
David Jay
Posts: 5684
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 5:54 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by David Jay » Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:22 pm

stocknoob4111 wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:37 pm
I am a bit averse to selling my equities in the 401k as those were acquired a few years ago and the cost basis of those funds are quite low.
What significance do you attach to "cost basis" inside a 401K? Serious question. What possible difference does it make with these funds?

I have never even contemplated "cost basis" of any fund in a tax-deferred or tax-exempt account.
Last edited by David Jay on Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future - Niels Bohr | To get the "risk premium", you really do have to take the risk - nisiprius

peppers
Posts: 1345
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by peppers » Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:35 pm

Company stock. Net Unrealized Appreciation (NUA) ?
"..the cavalry ain't comin' kid, you're on your own..."

stocknoob4111
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:52 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by stocknoob4111 » Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:27 pm

I have been thinking about this and note there are people providing arguments to both sides. I feel even thought there are tax penalties to be paid the whole idea of having part of your portfolio in bonds is to have accessible cash in a serious emergency and having to prevent selling equities at a loss in a downmarket since bonds are much less likely to be negative at the same time period. While the whole rolling over to Roth etc. may be possible you can't do it without losing your job first (I don't think you can roll over an active 401k!) and then liquidating your portfolio at the low point which again is doing something that you are trying to prevent in the first place (a custodian to custodian transfer will in effect "reset" your assets in the new account to it's money market fund and you will be re-investing from scratch thus locking in your losses at the low point!"). The only exception to this is if you already have a large enough Roth IRA that can cover your bond allocation but that is not my case. I don't have a Roth and due to my income I am not eligible for a Roth. I do have a Rollover IRA that I can convert to a Roth but will have to pay 33.3% taxes on it so no thanks!

For this reason I think bonds in taxable makes more sense despite the tax inefficiencies so that is going to be my personal choice. For my time horizon (20+ years) I think 100% equities in my 401k seems like the choice. I will re-allocate at the right moment closer to my 10 year horizon. Appreciate all the pro/con arguments in the thread!

autopeep
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 6:30 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by autopeep » Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:44 pm

stocknoob4111 wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:27 pm
I have been thinking about this and note there are people providing arguments to both sides. I feel even thought there are tax penalties to be paid the whole idea of having part of your portfolio in bonds is to have accessible cash in a serious emergency and having to prevent selling equities at a loss in a downmarket since bonds are much less likely to be negative at the same time period. While the whole rolling over to Roth etc. may be possible you can't do it without losing your job first (I don't think you can roll over an active 401k!) and then liquidating your portfolio at the low point which again is doing something that you are trying to prevent in the first place (a custodian to custodian transfer will in effect "reset" your assets in the new account to it's money market fund and you will be re-investing from scratch thus locking in your losses at the low point!"). The only exception to this is if you already have a large enough Roth IRA that can cover your bond allocation but that is not my case. I don't have a Roth and due to my income I am not eligible for a Roth. I do have a Rollover IRA that I can convert to a Roth but will have to pay 33.3% taxes on it so no thanks!

For this reason I think bonds in taxable makes more sense despite the tax inefficiencies so that is going to be my personal choice. For my time horizon (20+ years) I think 100% equities in my 401k seems like the choice. I will re-allocate at the right moment closer to my 10 year horizon. Appreciate all the pro/con arguments in the thread!
This entire response is rife with behavioral errors; however the most egregious one is "anchoring". Ignoring tax consequences, the price you purchase an asset at is irrevalant when you sell. If you need money sell assets, simple as that. The idea that you shouldn't sell stock in a down market is simply wrong. Do you see why?

Also, if you end up selling a substantial amount of bonds, you would need to sell stock to rebalance into bonds anyway

stocknoob4111
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:52 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by stocknoob4111 » Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:52 pm

autopeep wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:44 pm
The idea that you shouldn't sell stock in a down market is simply wrong. Do you see why?
selling stock in a downturn locks in your losses and goes against the buy and hold paradigm, why would you do it?

Jermbo
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 1:06 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by Jermbo » Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:19 pm

stocknoob4111 wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:52 pm
autopeep wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:44 pm
The idea that you shouldn't sell stock in a down market is simply wrong. Do you see why?
selling stock in a downturn locks in your losses and goes against the buy and hold paradigm, why would you do it?
If you have some bonds in 401k and you sell stocks at a loss in taxable account it's not locking in losses. You use bonds in 401k to buy same amount of stock you sold in taxable and you are in the exact same spot. You also benefited from tax loss harvesting in taxable.

TwstdSista
Posts: 987
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by TwstdSista » Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:21 pm

Jermbo wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:19 pm
stocknoob4111 wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:52 pm
autopeep wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:44 pm
The idea that you shouldn't sell stock in a down market is simply wrong. Do you see why?
selling stock in a downturn locks in your losses and goes against the buy and hold paradigm, why would you do it?
If you have some bonds in 401k and you sell stocks at a loss in taxable account it's not locking in losses. You use bonds in 401k to buy same amount of stock you sold in taxable and you are in the exact same spot. You also benefited from tax loss harvesting in taxable.
Isn't that a wash sale? (assuming you sold the same stocks/funds that you then purchased, and within 30 days)

Jermbo
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 1:06 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by Jermbo » Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:24 pm

Not with a 401k. Wash sale doesn't specify 401k. Wash sale applies to IRAs when doing sale of taxable and immediately buying same in roth or traditional.

And I'm referring to employer 401k. Wash sale might apply to solo 401k but I'm not sure since I don't have a solo 401k.

TwstdSista
Posts: 987
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by TwstdSista » Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:33 pm

Jermbo wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:24 pm
Not with a 401k. Wash sale doesn't specify 401k. Wash sale applies to IRAs when doing sale of taxable and immediately buying same in roth or traditional.

And I'm referring to employer 401k. Wash sale might apply to solo 401k but I'm not sure since I don't have a solo 401k.
Ahh. Thank you for the clarification! (I love how I learn something new every day on this forum)

chambers136
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:49 am

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by chambers136 » Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:37 pm

OP, I agree with your thinking. I have muni bonds in taxable just in case, and I leave the retirement almost 100% stock since I won’t touch it for 25+ years

Jermbo
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 1:06 pm

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by Jermbo » Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:37 pm

TwstdSista wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:33 pm
Jermbo wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:24 pm
Not with a 401k. Wash sale doesn't specify 401k. Wash sale applies to IRAs when doing sale of taxable and immediately buying same in roth or traditional.

And I'm referring to employer 401k. Wash sale might apply to solo 401k but I'm not sure since I don't have a solo 401k.
Ahh. Thank you for the clarification! (I love how I learn something new every day on this forum)
No problem. Also, if you wanted to know a bit more about wash sales, this is a great summary. https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Wash_sale

TwstdSista
Posts: 987
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by TwstdSista » Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:05 pm

^ Good info!

I'd say it probably does apply to a Solo 401k as well based on "If you sell stock and your spouse or a corporation you control buys substantially identical stock, you also have a wash sale."

drk
Posts: 824
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 10:33 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by drk » Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:19 pm

TwstdSista wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:05 pm
^ Good info!

I'd say it probably does apply to a Solo 401k as well based on "If you sell stock and your spouse or a corporation you control buys substantially identical stock, you also have a wash sale."
As someone pointed out to me recently, the IRS has specifically ruled only on IRAs (traditional and Roth). See the section directly preceding the line you just quoted, for example.

TwstdSista
Posts: 987
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Why even have Bonds in a 401k?

Post by TwstdSista » Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:23 pm

Ahh, I obviously misunderstood what I was reading. Thank you very much for all the great info! (and so sorry for derailing the OP's thread)

Post Reply