Now that jimrac has given an example, I understand the point he is trying to make. However, there's a couple of things he doesn't consider. IF you took an inheritance as cash, and IF you kept it as cash, then yes, you could spend it down without incurring income tax. However, if you take that money and invest it, you will pay taxes upon your gains. But you do get that Âstep up basis jimrac is depending upon. But of course, if you allow the account to compound over time without spending principal, you run the risk of incurring estate taxes for your own heirs. You could also buy an annuity, which has some limited tax advantages. Conversely, inheriting an IRA is different. You do not have to cash out an inherited IRA, in fact you should always roll it over into an FBO account in your and the deceasedÂs names. IF the owner was taking distributions, heirs also have to take distributions  but they can take the minimum distribution (Required Minimum Distribution, or RMD) which at young ages is a very modest amount indeed. If the owner was not taking distributions, the IRA can be left intact until age 70-1/2 for the heir. And in the case of an inherited Roth IRA, there is NEVER any income tax, for owner or heirs. Because the gains in the Roth compound tax-free, they win hands-down over any taxable account. The biggest issue is the salary restrictions (higher wage earners are barred from contributing to a Roth, although in 2010 only they can convert any amount they wish to pay income taxes on now) and the low annual contribution amount (although I expect Congress will probably increase those at some point). As my ex-boss, a respected CFP, used to say, "Don't let the tax tail wag the dog!" Tax planning should be looked at in a holistic fashion. Somebody's going to pay taxes, it just depends on who that is, and how much. Frankly, if you had a $1M mutual fund account - and I know quite a few people who do - if you were that concerned about your heirs paying income taxes, you'd set up an ILIT (Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust) for your immediate heirs, and a Bypass or QTIP trust for the future generation heirs.

USAA has a good rep so I don't think it should be a problem for you to leave it there for a while. SmartMoney's website I believe is free for access, but I could be wrong - I'm a WSJournal subscriber and the two are owned by the same company so there's a lot of cross-links on the websites. It isn't easy finding an good independent fiduciary advisor, but for people who need help developing a comprehensive financial plan (which is not the same as earning a high ROI on investments), I think it's essential. Most middle-class folks would find it helpful to talk to a neutral third party who can ask the hard questions and analyze your total financial picture. One thing for everyone to be aware of is that when I refer to financial planning, this is not only a legal term, it actually refers to creating a 'road map' that takes you from your current financial situation to achieving your short, medium, and long-term goals. It is aiming for a moving target, so any life-changing events - life, death, marriage, divorce, change of job - means some fine-tuning may be needed to your plan. To produce a good plan requires time spent in not only gathering all your financial info and analyzing it, but defining your goals. Some will be achievable and some will not be. Only you can define and prioritize them, and a good advisor will help if needed. You can get a financial plan, separate from investing advice, from any certified fiduciary advisor. Cheaper ones are computer 'plug in the numbers' produced, so always make sure you understand the base assumptions, and have multiple scenarios run to be sure you're covered for any contingencies/emergencies you haven't foreseen. Establish the total cost of meeting, gathering info, analyzing, and producing the plan(s) up front before signing anything. It takes time to do a financial plan, and anyone promising you it will be easy and fast isn't going to do a comprehensive job. It's an advantage for the fiduciary to be an insurance agent OR to be very familiar with insurance analysis, because many people could use advice on how to use different types of insurance to mitigate risk in various areas of their life. At a minimum you should contact at least three fiduciary advisors, obtain references, and investigate them thoroughly, before working with one. Even if all you need is a financial plan, do the research, but confine the requested references to clients who received a financial plan at least three years ago and are willing to discuss its usefulness. It is not uncommon for people to pay for a financial plan and then follow the suggested actions on their own; e.g., do their own investing, etc., without engaging the advisor to handle their portfolio. OTOH, a financial plan that goes unimplemented is just a useless piece of paper. We used to have to gently 'nag' our clients that they still hadn't completed certain checklist items on their plan, so it depends on how good you are at doing tasks that many people put off....until it's too late.

I do not think you can reduce the amounts of your required minimum distributions by listing your grandchild as a beneficiary. In order to avoid "market timing" in taking your distributions, try to make them "neutral" with respect to the market performance. You can do that my planning in advance to take equal distributions of 1/4 of the total amount to be distritubed each quarter of 2009 -- say, March, June, Sept, and Dec. If you are fortunate enough that you do not need the money from your distribution for living expenses, you can just transfer the money to a taxable account and put it in a similar investment that it was in in the tax deferred account -- or you could take the opportunity to consider a different investment. One more thing: If you made any IRA contributions and paid taxes on them because your income was above the limit for taking a tax deduction, your required minimum distribution should deduct those taxed contribitutions, or you would be paying taxes on that money twice. I'm sure there an IRS information sheet that explains that whole situation. It makes excellent reading if you have insomnia. Look up tax form 8606. That's the one you should be using when you file your return to report your cumulated taxed IRA contributions. Have fun.

A basic principle of taxation in the USA is every dollar is taxed once and only once. (Qualifying Roth IRA withdrawals can be an exception.) Your contributions to the Roth IRA should not be taxed again by the IRS because you already paid taxes on those contributions when you put them into the Roth IRA. The earnings on the Roth IRA may or may not be taxable depending on your circumstances. For example, how old are you, how long were the funds in the IRA, were there any circumstances that existed in your life that would qualify you for an exception to the 10% penalty for early withdrawal? Page 58 of the pub linked to below should help you answer your questions. In my 12 years of preparing taxes, one of my favorite things to do is prove the IRS wrong when they assess additional taxes. Good luck. Here is a link that might be useful: IRS Pub 590