A North Carolina listener recently called into the Clark Howard podcast to ask about backdoor IRAs, a legal strategy that allows high-income earners to bypass income limits on Roth IRA contributions.
On the April 22 episode of his podcast, Clark Howard fielded a question from a high-earning North Carolina listener already running backdoor Roth conversions, and delivered one of the most sweeping prescriptions in retail personal finance: “Overwhelmingly, I’d say probably 95% of wage earners would be better off going all in on Roth 401(k) instead of traditional 401(k).” The stakes behind that number are larger than most savers realize.
Get the income profile right, and you build a retirement account the IRS cannot tax again while sidestepping a Medicare surcharge most workers never see coming. Get it wrong, and you surrender a deduction worth real money during your highest-earning years and risk leaving a smaller nest egg than the traditional route would have produced. That tradeoff is the whole game.
The Verdict: Howard Is Right for Most Workers, With One Hard Threshold
Howard’s broad advice holds for the vast majority of W-2 earners, built on three mechanics that amplify each other over decades.
The first is tax-free growth. A Roth 401(k) is funded with after-tax dollars, grows completely untaxed, and comes out untaxed in retirement. A traditional 401(k) defers tax to a future rate you cannot know today. With the federal funds target range sitting at 3.50% to 3.75% and the federal debt continuing to expand, wagering that future tax rates will be lower than current ones is the speculative position, not the cautious one.
The second mechanic is the contribution math Howard flagged directly. Maxing a Roth 401(k) requires more out-of-pocket cash than maxing a traditional, because you pay the tax now rather than passing the bill to your future self. “You won’t have the money to put into the regular investment brokerage account, but the advantage is enormous down the road because that money will have grown tax-free and you’ll spend it tax-free,” Howard told the caller. In practice, the brokerage side account that savers intend to fund with their traditional 401(k) tax savings rarely gets fully funded. Every dividend and capital gain along the way is taxable. The Roth account carries none of that drag.
The third mechanic is the one most savers overlook entirely: Medicare IRMAA. “If you have too much money in traditionals, you get hit with a massive penalty every month, a financial penalty on receiving Medicare in retirement,” Howard said. Required minimum distributions from traditional 401(k)s and IRAs count as ordinary income, and once that income clears certain thresholds, Medicare Part B and Part D premiums climb in tiers. For 2026, the standard Part B premium is $202.90 per month. Cross the lowest IRMAA threshold (set at $109,000 for single filers and $218,000 for married couples filing jointly), and that premium can jump by $81.20 to as much as $487.00 per month per person. Roth distributions do not count toward those thresholds at all. A retiree with seven figures sitting in a traditional 401(k) can quietly pay thousands of extra dollars in Medicare premiums every year, for life.
Howard’s $500,000 Line
Howard drew a firm dividing line. “If you’re earning $500,000 a year or more, huge money. Then you may well benefit from doing a mix of a traditional 401(k) and a Roth 401(k). If your earnings are meaningfully below $500,000, you would benefit by going fully into the Roth 401(k).”
At high income levels, the current marginal federal rate is almost certainly higher than the rate a retiree will face on retirement withdrawals, which gives the traditional deduction real present-dollar value. Below that threshold, the gap narrows quickly, and the Medicare cost savings plus decades of tax-free compounding tilt the math firmly toward Roth.
One additional wrinkle: starting in 2026, a SECURE 2.0 provision requires workers whose Social Security wages exceed $150,000 to make any 401(k) catch-up contributions as Roth rather than pre-tax. For higher earners already near Howard’s threshold, this rule accelerates the shift toward Roth balances by default, regardless of personal preference.
Who This Fits and Who It Doesn’t
The all-Roth approach works best for the dual-income professional couple earning a combined $200,000 to $400,000, with decades remaining before retirement, who can absorb the higher up-front tax cost without reducing their contribution rate. It also suits the early-career worker currently in a low bracket who expects meaningful raises ahead, and anyone already maxing a 401(k) with a long compounding runway in front of them.
The math shifts for three specific profiles. The first is the saver well above Howard’s $500,000 threshold, where today’s marginal rate is likely higher than any realistic retirement rate. The second is the worker in a high-tax state who plans to retire in a state with no income tax, locking in the deduction at the high rate and drawing it down tax-free later. The third is the late-career employee five to ten years from retirement, for whom there is limited runway for tax-free compounding to overcome the deferred-deduction advantage. For each of these, a blend makes more sense than going all in one direction.
The Backdoor Detail and What to Do This Week
For high earners locked out of direct Roth IRA contributions, Howard described the workaround clearly: “There’s this obscure creature called a non-deductible IRA that has no income limits on it. And people can do a non-deductible IRA, and if you jump through the right hoops, you can then virtually immediately convert it into Roth IRA money.” The pro-rata rule and any existing pre-tax IRA balances complicate the math significantly, which is why Howard pointed to it as an option without prescribing it universally.
Some context on the numbers: for 2026, the Roth IRA contribution limit is $7,500 per person ($8,600 for those 50 and older), per IRS Notice 2025-67. Direct Roth IRA eligibility phases out between $153,000 and $168,000 of modified adjusted gross income for single filers, and between $242,000 and $252,000 for married couples filing jointly. Anyone above those ceilings cannot contribute directly but can still pursue the backdoor strategy, provided their plan and existing IRA structure support it cleanly. On the 401(k) side, the 2026 employee deferral limit is $24,500, and the total defined-contribution cap across employer and employee contributions reaches $72,000 per person for the year.
The action step is straightforward. Pull up your 401(k) portal this week and check whether the plan offers a Roth 401(k) option. If your household income sits below Howard’s $500,000 threshold and contributions are currently flowing to the traditional side, switch the election for new contributions and run the numbers on whether you can sustain your current savings rate after the higher net paycheck cost.
Howard’s 95% figure is a deliberate overstatement used to make a directional point. The Roth advantage compounds quietly over decades, and the Medicare premium surcharge it helps you avoid is a cost that most savers never see until the bill arrives in retirement.
Editor’s note: This article was updated to include the 2026 IRS contribution figures, including the $24,500 employee deferral limit for 401(k) plans, the $7,500 Roth IRA contribution limit per IRS Notice 2025-67, the 2026 Roth IRA income phase-out ranges ($153,000 to $168,000 for single filers; $242,000 to $252,000 for married joint filers), the standard Medicare Part B premium of $202.90 per month and corresponding IRMAA surcharge range of $81.20 to $487.00 per month, and the SECURE 2.0 provision requiring Roth treatment for catch-up contributions by workers with Social Security wages above $150,000 beginning in 2026.
Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.
Top Gaining Stocks
Top Losing Stocks