Should You Take Your First RMD in 2026 or Wait Until April 2027? The Tax Trade-Off Explained

Accounts like 401(k)s and traditional IRAs have up-front tax breaks that allow you to deduct your contributions from your taxable income. In return, you’re required to pay taxes on the withdrawals you make from these accounts in retirement.

To avoid a situation where a retiree doesn’t withdraw from these accounts to avoid paying taxes, the IRA has required minimum distributions (RMDs) that kick in the year you turn 73 years old.

Generally, you’re required to take your RMDs by Dec. 31 of a given year, except the year you turn 73. That year, you can delay your RMDs until April 1 of the following year. For example, if you turn 73 in 2026, you’ll have until April 1, 2027, to take your RMD.

However, just because you can delay until April doesn’t mean everyone should. Let’s take a look at which option makes sense.

Image source: Getty Images.

The tax trade-off of waiting until April

The first thing to note is that even if you delay your first RMD until April of the following year, you’ll still need to take that year’s RMD by Dec. 31. For instance, if you delay 2026’s RMD until April 1, 2027, you’ll still need to take 2027’s RMD by Dec. 31, 2027.

If you decide to delay your RMD until next April, you would find yourself in a situation where you’ll have two RMDs added to your taxable income for the year, increasing how much you owe in taxes. Depending on how much your RMDs are, you could find yourself in a higher tax bracket once both RMDs are added to your taxable income.

Taking your first RMD by Dec. 31 also helps you avoid a situation where the higher income from two RMDs potentially puts you in a position to owe taxes on your Social Security benefits because the relevant income pushes you above the IRS threshold.

Although taking your RMD by Dec. 31 is the “safe” choice, delaying until April could make sense if you expect your income that year to be lower and the two RMDs wouldn’t cause too much of a tax hit.

How to calculate your RMD

Your RMD is based on two factors: the total value of your retirement account(s) at the end of the previous year and the age you’ll turn in the current year. For example, if you’re currently 76 but turn 77 this year, 77 would be the age used. However, in this case, we’ll stick with 73 since it’s the first year of your RMDs.

Once you know those, determining your exact RMD is a two-step process:

  1. Refer to the IRS life expectancy table to find your life expectancy factor (LEF). The Uniform Lifetime Table is what applies to most retirees, unless your spouse is your sole beneficiary and they’re more than 10 years younger than you. In that case, you’ll use the Joint Life Expectancy Table.
  2. Divide your account balance(s) at the end of the previous year by your LEF.

At age 73, your LEF would be 26.5 if you’re using the Uniform Lifetime Table. Below is how much your RMD would be based on different account balances at the end of 2025:

Account Value(s) at the End of 2025 Required Minimum Distribution
$250,000 $9,434
$500,000 $18,868
$1 million $37,736
$1.5 million $56,604
$2 million $75,472

Table by author. RMDs rounded up to the nearest dollar.

What happens if you don’t take your RMD?

Failing to take your RMD could result in a penalty equal to 25% of the amount you were supposed to withdraw but didn’t. For example, if your RMD is $35,000 and you only withdraw $25,000, your penalty would be $2,500 (25% of $10,000).

If you correct the mistake within two years of the missed deadline (by taking the RMD), the penalty could be reduced to 10%. In that scenario, the penalty would be $1,000 instead of $2,500.

Ideally, you’d stay up to date on your RMDs and could avoid the penalty altogether.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • Comment
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
Add a comment
Add a comment
No comments