Understanding ROTH Retirement Accounts: The Hidden Risks

March 19, 2025

The ROTH Retirement Account, named for Senator William Roth, was introduced as part of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. The main feature of a ROTH account is that contributions are made with post-tax dollars as opposed to pre-tax; this means that any withdrawals, including earnings on the investments, are tax-free in retirement. This advantage can be particularly attractive for those individuals who anticipate being in a higher tax bracket later in life. 


However, this needs to be weighed against the uncertainty about whether and for how long this tax status will be truly protected. Can you safely invest in a ROTH account and really expect tax-free withdrawals ten, twenty, or thirty years down the line? 

Before we talk through the drawbacks of a ROTH Retirement Account, let’s consider additional aspects that can make a ROTH account attractive. Further potential benefits of a ROTH retirement account include: 



  • No Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs): Unlike traditional retirement accounts, ROTH retirement accounts do not require mandatory withdrawals at a certain age. 
  • Flexibility: Contributions (though not earnings) to a ROTH IRA account can be withdrawn at any time without penalties, providing liquidity in case of financial emergencies. For workplace retirement accounts (such as ROTH 401(k), 403(b), and 457(b) accounts), one may be able to withdraw contributions upon attaining age 59 ½ or other distributable event such as separation from service. 
  • State Retirement Programs: Many states, such as California and Oregon, have helped lower-income earners build retirement savings by implementing automatic ROTH programs for workers that don’t have access to employer-sponsored plans. 


Despite these benefits, ROTH accounts carry significant risks that many fail to consider. The two most commonly known drawbacks of ROTH accounts are Income Limitations and the Five-Year Rule.   


  • Income Limitations: Eligibility for direct ROTH IRA contributions is restricted based on income level. In 2025, the phase-out range starts at $150,000 for single filers and $236,000 for married couples filing jointly. On the other hand, these limitations do NOT apply to workplace retirement Plans such as ROTH 401(k), 403(b), and 457(b) accounts. 
  • Five-Year Rule: To qualify for tax-free withdrawals, the ROTH account must be at least five years old. 

 

However, the biggest risk—and perhaps the reason to avoid ROTH accounts altogether—is congressional risk. Can or will the government change the rules? If so, how? A major downside of ROTH accounts is their vulnerability to future tax law changes. Congress has a long history of shifting tax policies, often to the detriment of retirees. While ROTH withdrawals are currently tax-free, this status is not guaranteed indefinitely. The same government that promises tax-free withdrawals today could decide to tax them tomorrow. 

 

A crucial example of shifting government policy is Social Security. Originally, Social Security benefits were completely untaxed. However, in 1983, Congress introduced taxation on benefits for higher-income retirees, and in 1993, this taxation was expanded. This example illustrates a simple fact: just because something is untaxed today doesn’t mean it will remain that way. ROTH accounts, much like Social Security, could become a target for taxation. 

 

Political Proposals to Tax ROTH Accounts 

 

There is already clear evidence that lawmakers have considered taxing ROTH accounts in various ways. Both President Obama and President Biden proposed budget plans that would have limited the benefits of ROTH accounts or introduced new taxation methods, including restricting contributions for high-income earners and mandating distributions from large ROTH balances (Obama), and restrictions on "mega-ROTH" accounts used by wealthy individuals and prohibiting certain types of conversions (Biden). Over the years, various bills have been introduced in Congress aiming to alter the tax advantages of ROTH accounts. Some proposals have suggested capping the total amount that can be held in a ROTH or implementing new taxes on large balances. 

 

Why This Matters for You 

 

If you are planning to rely on tax-free withdrawals in retirement, keep in mind that the government may change the rules before then.  History shows us that tax policies evolve. This uncertainty makes ROTH accounts a risky long-term strategy. Mathematically, a ROTH account is always better if it’s taxed once. However, it’s never better if it’s taxed twice. 

 

We recommend steering clear of these accounts, or at least employing a balanced strategy that prioritizes tax diversification, with the knowledge that you might not have true tax-free withdrawals from your ROTH accounts when the time comes.   

September 15, 2026
The Challenge Sometimes the most expensive retirement plan mistakes aren't dramatic. They're quiet. A former client of ours changed retirement plan providers following an acquisition several years prior. On the surface, everything appeared to be operating normally after moving to the new provider: employees continued making contributions to the plan, the plan’s investments remained in place, and the business continued its normal operations. Then another merger opportunity came along. As part of their due diligence process, the buyers reviewed the retirement plan. What they found immediately raised concerns. The annual Form 5500 filings required by ERISA law had not been submitted for several years. That also meant that none of the required compliance testing had been completed, and routine administrative responsibilities had also gone undone. What had started as a routine review quickly became a significant obstacle to completing the business sale. The Hidden Risk Many employers assume that once a retirement plan provider is hired, responsibility for the plan’s ongoing administration has effectively been transferred to that provider. But a plan sponsor is never completely relieved of its responsibility to oversee the plan. Even when outside providers are hired to handle filings, testing, recordkeeping, or other administrative functions, the employer still needs to make sure those responsibilities are being fulfilled. At the same time, there is an important difference between a provider that simply waits for the employer to supply information and one that actively works with the employer to make sure the plan stays on track. In this case, some of the missing work may have resulted from information requested by the provider that was never supplied by the employer. Technically, the employer still had a responsibility to provide that information and ensure the work was completed. But years of required administration should not quietly disappear into a communication gap. A proactive administrator follows up. If the usual contact isn’t responding, they escalate the issue. They make sure the appropriate people understand what is outstanding, why it matters, and what could happen if it isn’t addressed. Retirement plans require ongoing attention every year, including government filings, compliance testing, participant administration, documentation, and, when necessary, operational corrections. When those responsibilities are neglected, the consequences may not become obvious immediately. Instead, problems can accumulate quietly in the background until an IRS inquiry, Department of Labor investigation, audit, or—as in this case—a business transaction suddenly exposes years of unresolved issues. The prospective buyer made it clear that the retirement plan issues needed to be addressed before the transaction could move forward. The Rescue Knowing we had previously administered their plan, the current company leadership contacted us. Our first step was to determine the full scope of the problem. The timing made the situation particularly challenging. This wasn’t simply a retirement plan cleanup project. A business transaction was underway, and the company needed answers quickly. We assembled a team to determine the full scope of the problem and begin developing a path forward. Because we have deep experience with taking over neglected plans, we were able to separate perceived problems from actual compliance issues and reconstruct the plan's history. In reviewing the prior documentation, we identified exactly which administrative functions had been completed and which had been missed. We gathered historical payroll and participant data and developed a comprehensive correction strategy. Having access to historical plan records was especially important. Retirement plan problems may not surface until years after the underlying event, making good record retention critical. If you’re curious about how long to hold onto plan documentation, please see our blog post here . The final correction effort proved to be far more manageable than originally feared. Instead of allowing uncertainty around the retirement plan to continue hanging over the transaction, the employer now understood what had actually gone wrong, what needed to be corrected, and what steps were required to move forward. The Outcome With the correction efforts clarified and a clear roadmap in place, the employer was able to begin correcting the plan and continue moving toward its business transaction. More importantly, the company avoided entering the acquisition process with unresolved retirement plan liabilities hanging over or ruining the deal. The experience also reinforced an important lesson: Changing retirement plan providers doesn't eliminate administrative responsibilities. But it also demonstrated why the quality of the administrator matters. A good retirement plan administrator doesn’t simply process the information that arrives. They help make sure the information arrives in the first place. The Lesson: Oversight Is a Shared Process Employers ultimately have a responsibility to oversee their retirement plans, even when they hire professionals to handle much of the day-to-day work. That doesn’t mean the employer should have to become a retirement plan expert or personally track every filing deadline and compliance requirement. That’s one of the reasons experienced administration matters. A proactive provider should help keep the employer informed, identify missing information, follow up when something is outstanding, and escalate issues before a missed request becomes a missed filing—or several years of missed filings. The cost of failing to do so can extend well beyond an annual administration fee: Missed filings and potential penalties Incomplete compliance testing Corrective work Additional professional fees Delayed business transactions Uncertainty during mergers and acquisitions  By the time those costs appear, they can far exceed whatever might have been saved by choosing a lower-cost service model. That’s why retirement plan administration shouldn’t simply be viewed as paperwork. It should be viewed as an ongoing partnership in managing risk.
August 18, 2026
The Challenge A business owner came to us after receiving confusing news from their retirement plan actuary. Their Defined Benefit (Cash Balance) Plan had performed exceptionally well over several years; strong investment returns seemed to have created what’s called an overfunded Plan. While it seems like a positive name, an overfunded plan can create excessive and unexpected tax liabilities. So, their actuary recommended terminating the Plan by transferring the excess assets into the company's other Plan, a 401(k)/Profit Sharing Plan, before eventually closing both Plans, a lengthy and complicated process.
July 15, 2026
As we wrap up the second quarter of 2026, one trend continues to stand out: retirement plans are becoming increasingly specialized. Whether driven by changing regulations, unique workforce structures, or evolving business goals, employers are finding that a one-size-fits-all approach simply doesn't work. This quarter, we explored the unique retirement plan challenges facing several industries—including medical and dental practices, construction companies, architecture and design firms, wineries, and California employers navigating CalSavers requirements. We also continued our series on the hidden risks of low-quality retirement plan services, highlighting how operational complexity, fragmented accountability, and misaligned incentives can create costs that extend far beyond administrative fees. For employers still evaluating their retirement plan options, we also discussed opportunities that many business owners overlook, including the ability to establish retirement plans after filing a tax extension and potentially generate meaningful tax savings. Below is a recap of the articles we published this quarter. We hope they provide practical insights to help you reduce risk, improve plan performance, and make more informed retirement plan decisions.
More Posts