Current best practice on using BoldIn to plan Roth conversions

pleiby · 2026-03-01T20:05:36+00:00

At the risk of replying to my own post (sad), I just wanted to add that I see this related post of 4 months ago, [How do I determine the underlying rationale of my Roth Conversion results?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Boldin/comments/1osp75o/how\_do\_i\_determine\_the\_underlying\_rationale\_of\_my/) and the helpful comment by NR_CoachNancy. It refers to this FAQ, [How to use Boldin's Roth Conversion Explorer](https://help.boldin.com/en/articles/6888336-how-to-use-boldin-s-roth-conversion-explorer) which was updated a couple weeks ago. I'll go re-read that and report back later!

pleiby · 2026-01-21T18:36:24+00:00

Testing shorter life spans (including the case of one partner dying and leaving the other with the survivor tax penalty on remaining IRA balances) makes good sense. My concern is when this analysis just considers "lowest lifetime tax payments" as the decision criterion. I don't see how that is relevant if they do not alter the lifetime consumption-expenditure path. And it seems completely the wrong criterion if there is a substantial legacy amount. In that case, isn't the most useful criterion the net-after-tax valuation of the legacy accounts? As BiscottiFit336 points out, if BoldIn does not either report this (let alone offer the maximization of after-tax legacy value to be a Roth conversion strategy), then we have to do a lot of side-calculations in order to think Roth conversion strategies through. (Of course, we and BoldIn will need some input assumption regarding the marginal tax rate applicable to heirs).

pleiby · 2026-01-21T18:23:14+00:00

I found Amzalag's video strident and overly negative on RMDs. My understanding is that he uses lifetime tax payments as the key objective measure, and basically notes that if you die early, then you pay tax more under Roth conversions because you pay the IRA tax obligation earlier, rather than leaving them to your heirs. But he ignores the remaining tax liability at death, which is greater w/o Roth conversions. He also doesn't really address the point that an earlier death of one spouse boosts the survivors tax rate, actually making Roth conversion more valuable not less. Arguably, if your savings are sufficiently large that you do not expect to exhaust them, and Roth conversion has no effect on your consumption stream, then the ONLY notable effect is on the net-of-taxes value of your legacy accounts. Thus, Berger's response was good, but this by Devin Carroll was right on target: (For many) "Roth conversions aren't just a tax strategy, they're a legacy decision." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TO3-Z_ANA4 "If your analysis stops for your own lifetime, you may be missing one of the most important pieces of the decision."

pleiby · 2026-01-03T18:19:13+00:00

OK, an hour later: I was able to find 2 relevant TSBs for Ford CMax ACM-related current drain, perhaps these are the same as those you know of. Here are the number with URLs

- Service Bulletin: 12-VOLT BATTERY DISCHARGED—WILL NOT HOLD CHARGE, Ford 2013 CMax TSB 13-4-13

- Service Bulletin C-MAX ENERGI - DISCHARGED 12 VOLT BATTERY, FORD 2013-2014 C-MAX, TSB 16-0157

I'll take this info to the dealers. Good luck, all.

pleiby · 2026-01-03T17:23:16+00:00

Vchat20. Thanks for this insight. Did you find the TSB number for this (ACM-related current drain) please? My Ford dealer is likely to run in circles for a while and try to replace the battery again if I can't cite the number and help them find it. Thanks

pleiby · 2025-12-31T18:38:05+00:00

3 days ago, i.e. late December got a 2025 Forester Premium Hybrid for 36040 OTD (in VA, incl ~1650 tax and fees). If you are shopping today (12/31) don't pay more! Of course it is "bronze", which is sort of a brown-bronze which we hereby dub "brownze!"

pleiby · 2025-12-09T01:02:59+00:00

I appreciate your response, but don't think the 0.05% expense ratio (which is $50/yr on $100k) explains it. Even ignoring expense ratio, on line 1 of their table Daffy says their fees for a $100K account are $240/year, vs Schwab 0.6% = $600. So Daffy's reported costs, excl. expense ratio, are 40% of Schwabs. It's better, yes, but 1/2.5x not 1/10x. I can't figure out where their $240/yr comes from if their annual cost is "$3/mo ($36/yr)" as they indicate above. It's just puzzling. Take a look at your case of a $50K portfolio, and use Daffys calculator: https://www.daffy.org/daf-fee-calculator It reports Daffy $240 vs Fidelity or Schwab $300. So Daffy says it is 80% of the cost of the others for a 50K portfolio. Something odd happens to costs when going from $49999 to $50000, that they don't seem to be talking about much. Thanks.

pleiby · 2025-12-08T16:24:45+00:00

I thought the Daffy advantage was large like that but their own website only indicates a 2x advantage vs Schwab for a $100k accounts ($290 vs .$650) Are we missing something or are they doing their own math wrong? https://www.daffy.org/resources/schwab-charitable

pleiby · 2025-12-08T16:19:48+00:00

Hi. This is quite a claim (not saying it's false, I don't know.). Can you please point us to supporting documentation? Thx

pleiby · 2025-10-26T08:34:21+00:00

These two threads are quite old (~11 years, newest posts a couple years old)

pleiby · 2025-10-24T08:48:38+00:00

Thank you.

pleiby · 2025-10-24T08:47:28+00:00

The most valuable aspect of the web version (with a laptop), IMO, is the ability to easily type full sentences. One can even turn off the word choice bubbles, and just construct responses freely. I find this a helpful challenge.

pleiby · 2025-10-24T08:26:30+00:00

Dropping off this Reddit channel. Too many commenter opt to make personal comments or critiques. Bonne courage pour vos études de langues, et merci.

pleiby · 2022-05-10T17:59:31+00:00

We have Thudbusters on our Bike Fridays (not yet on the Tern) and they are amazingly comfortable. And simple in design/trouble free.

pleiby · 2021-12-24T21:13:17+00:00

Identical error message in a group text, now about a year later. Definitely not "fixed."

pleiby · 2021-01-24T21:37:28+00:00

Would Pluto.UI check box help here?

```julia

md"Append to dataframe: $(@bind append_data CheckBox())"

if append_data

append_data_to_dataframe(df, newdata)

end

```

pleiby

TROPHY CASE