Close Close
Popular Financial Topics Discover relevant content from across the suite of ALM legal publications From the Industry More content from ThinkAdvisor and select sponsors Investment Advisor Issue Gallery Read digital editions of Investment Advisor Magazine Tax Facts Get clear, current, and reliable answers to pressing tax questions
Luminaries Awards
ThinkAdvisor
headshot of Michael Finke, a professor for the American College of Financial Services

Practice Management > Compensation and Fees

How to Make Your Fees Part of Clients' Tax Strategy

X
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

What You Need to Know

  • While it generally makes sense to take fees from traditional IRAs, some investors might in fact be better off taking all fees from taxable accounts.
  • Investors benefit from spending from the lowest expected after-tax return, generally assets whose gains are taxed annually.
  • While there are a lot of tax-saving options for billing fees, remember: A traditional IRA cannot be billed for a Roth IRA.

Does it make sense to bill clients for advisory fees from a qualified account?

According to Jeff Levine, chief planning officer at Buckingham Wealth Partners, “The biggest opportunity most advisors completely blow is the opportunity to bill Roth advisory fees from taxable accounts. Since a Roth grows tax-free, it is ALWAYS better to bill the Roth’s fees from a taxable account (assuming the funds are available).”

Should an advisor bill from a traditional individual retirement account? “That’s more nuanced,” notes Levine.

A Strategic Approach to Fees

Since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the ability to take a tax deduction on investment fees (other than advice on a business), there are opportunities to think strategically about the accounts used to pay fees. Many companies give advisors some latitude about which accounts they use to bill clients for advisory fees.

According to Greg Webster, vice president and head of Eagle Strategies at New York Life, “We do allow clients to have the fees for an account (like a Roth) to be deducted from another account of the client’s choosing.“

Allowing a client to use taxable funds to pay for fees rather than a Roth will result in greater after-tax future wealth. All else equal, Roth accounts always dominate taxable investments.

Traditional IRAs are different. A portion of the account is effectively owned by the government since funds went into the account pretax and are taxable upon withdrawal.

If you put $1,000 in a traditional IRA using pretax dollars and then can immediately use the $1,000 to pay for investment management fees, this can be equivalent to saving $429 in after-tax income for a worker in a 30% marginal tax bracket.

In other words, the worker would need to earn $1,429 in salary in order to pay the $1,000 after-tax fee. Or they can earn $1,000 in salary, save it all in a traditional account and use it to pay for investment advice.

It would be great if one could bill for all investment management fees for a Roth from a traditional IRA, but that isn’t possible. A Levine explains, “If it’s a traditional IRA account, you can bill from the traditional IRA or from a taxable account. If it’s for a Roth IRA, you can bill from the Roth IRA, or from a taxable account. You cannot, however, bill a traditional IRA for the Roth IRA.”

Notice I use the term “investment management fees.”

Levine says, “Technically, the ability to deduct IRA/Roth IRA fees from a taxable account is limited to fees related to INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT. Thus, to the extent an advisory fee is for multiple purposes (e.g., financial planning and investment advisory services), there is a reasonable argument to be made as to how much of a fee can be billed from which type of account.”

An advisor may be better off describing their fee as an investment management fee, with fees for planning services either billed separately or provided free of charge.

Tax Rates & Returns

Does it always make sense to take fees from a traditional IRA? Generally yes, but some investors might in fact be better off taking all fees from taxable accounts. This is because the fees that could have been withdrawn from a traditional IRA or 401(k) could have remained in the account growing tax-free over time.

With a long enough time horizon and a high enough rate of return, the funds left in the traditional account could have achieved a higher after-tax return despite starting out with a 30% marginal tax rate disadvantage.

Of course, the higher the investor’s tax rate when they forgo taxes by contributing to a traditional savings account, the bigger the hurdle the investor would need to surmount to break even.

Consider the same worker who pays $1,000 for fees from a traditional account. They could have instead earned $1,429 in a taxable account and paid the $1,000 in after-tax fees. Had they left the $1,000 alone in the traditional account, eventually the tax-deferred growth would exceed the after-tax growth of a taxable investment even at a lower capital gains tax rate.

Levine estimates that at a 23.8% capital gains tax rate, the breakeven for a worker with a 37% marginal income tax would be 26 years at a 8% rate of return and 35 years at a 6% rate of return.

Since returns are unknown, the best strategy for most investors is likely to bill for investment advice for a traditional investment account using funds from the account itself.

“Candidly, even where the fee for a pretax account mathematically makes sense to bill directly from a taxable account, the friction and additional conversations it creates may not make it ‘worth it’ anyway,” notes Levine.

Where to Look First

When deciding which taxable assets to withdraw advisory fees, it makes sense to use the most tax-inefficient investments first. In a recent CE webinar for Kitces.com, I compare the net (after-tax) return of various nonqualified investments including annually taxable (such as bonds and cash) to basis assets (such as long-term stock).

Investors benefit from spending first from the assets with the lowest expected after-tax return, generally those whose gains are taxed annually, and spending last from assets with the highest net return, such as appreciated passive stock funds. Withdrawing investment fees from cash then makes perfect sense.

Annuities also provide a tax-deferral advantage, especially when used to house tax-disadvantaged investments whose gains would otherwise be taxed annually. While investors would normally pay income taxes on funds withdrawn from the annuity, they can pay for advisory fees from annuity growth without being subject to taxation.

Tim Rembowski, vice president at DPL Financial Partners, notes that paying with untaxed growth rather than after-tax dollars is an advantage of investing in a nonqualified annuity. “Now that advisory fees can’t be deducted, paying with tax-deferred dollars from the annuity is a huge benefit to the client.”


NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.