[Anonymous]

I’m in Chapter 2 of the Becker lecture where the different types of IRAs are discussed. There is a phase-out for the Roth IRA where if you make a certain amount you cannot invest in a Roth. For traditional IRAs, above-the-line adjustments are allowed where the taxpayer may or may not qualify for a deduction, depending on how much money they make and whether they have a pension. For a non-deductible IRA, there is no phase-out and there is no deductible amount. My question is what is the advantage of someone investing in a non-deductible IRA versus a traditional IRA when that person does not qualify for the adjustment? In other words, if I make $200k and have a pension plan, I cannot deduct anything if I am in a traditional IRA, so what is the advantage of putting my money in a non-deductible IRA in this scenario? I think I’m getting tripped up on Tim’s “last resort” no phase-out language.

Thanks!