I’m 55 and retiring in 6 years. Should I be switching to Roth 401(k) now?

The article is a retirement-planning Q&A focused on whether a 55-year-old should shift savings into a Roth 401(k) versus a traditional 401(k) over the next six years. It highlights a current 65/35 traditional-to-Roth allocation and frames the decision around future tax advantages, but provides no market-moving data, earnings, or policy change. Overall impact is minimal and the piece is advisory rather than event-driven.

Analysis

This is less a market story than a tax-optionality story: the key issue is not whether Roth is “better,” but whether the household can arbitrage a lower marginal tax rate today against a likely higher effective tax rate later once required distributions and Social Security create income stacking. With a 55/43 couple retiring in ~6 years, the decision tree is dominated by the next decade of tax brackets, not retirement date alone. The current 65/35 traditional-to-Roth mix suggests they already have some hedge against future tax uncertainty; the marginal choice should probably be driven by expected income gaps from retirement until age 73, when RMD pressure begins to rise sharply on pre-tax balances.

The second-order effect most investors miss is sequence-of-tax risk: in the years between retirement and Medicare/RMDs, low taxable income often creates a “window” where traditional 401(k) deferrals and partial Roth conversions can be executed at unusually favorable rates. That window is often more valuable than maxing Roth contributions while still employed, because it allows deliberate bracket management rather than a binary election. If they expect one spouse to work longer, or if pensions/Social Security will already consume the 12%-22% federal bracket, Roth becomes more attractive; if they expect a multi-year income trough, traditional contributions plus back-end conversions may dominate.

The contrarian view is that many near-retirees overpay for Roth certainty when their real risk is flexibility. A Roth-heavy mix is most valuable when future tax rates are clearly higher, but for many households the true edge comes from preserving pre-tax assets now and executing conversions in a controlled way during low-income years. The hidden catalyst is legislation: future bracket changes, RMD rules, or Social Security taxation tweaks can shift the optimal mix, but those changes are hard to forecast and argue for maintaining optionality rather than making an all-in switch today.

Key Decisions for Investors

• Do not make a binary 100% Roth switch now; maintain a blended 401(k) allocation and use the next 6 years to build optionality. Best risk/reward is preserving traditional deferrals while earmarking future conversion capacity.
• Model a post-retirement conversion ladder for years 1-7 after retirement, targeting fill-up of the lower tax brackets before RMD age. This is the highest-IRR tax move if household income drops materially.
• If one spouse remains employed or pension/Social Security income will keep taxable income elevated, tilt incremental contributions toward Roth 401(k) for that working spouse only; otherwise traditional remains superior on a marginal basis.
• Build a tax-bracket dashboard now: compare expected marginal rate today vs. projected effective rate at ages 65, 70, and 75. Reassess annually; the decision should be revisited whenever earned income changes or legislation alters brackets/RMDs.
• If available, prioritize tax diversification over contribution purity: keep the 65/35 mix roughly stable and increase Roth only when a specific bracket-hedging need is identified, rather than as a blanket forecast on future tax rates.