Top Law Schools

Is there any reason to contribute to my 401k if I still have 240k in student loans accruing at 5% interest? Employer does not match.

I'm also interested in this. Student loan debt for me is above 6%

Always contribute. You can invest the money in your 401k and the investments are not taxed at all. If you invested most other ways you'd have to pay CG taxes.

Basically, 401ks are investment vehicles. Always contribute the max...In my opinion.

I don't know what the right answer to this question is, so I'm interested in seeing the responses.

I know associates who've just focused on paying down debt, others who focus on their investments, and some who do both. IMO, personal finance is really personal. So for me, it'd boil down to where I want to be (financially speaking) tomorrow. In other words, what helps me sleep the best at night: reducing the debt, maxing out my 401(k), or doing some of both?

estefanchanning wrote:Always contribute. You can invest the money in your 401k and the investments are not taxed at all. If you invested most other ways you'd have to pay CG taxes.

Basically, 401ks are investment vehicles. Always contribute the max...In my opinion.

Damn, that's some pretty poor advice. Like you literally have no clue here.

Anyway, without an employer match, paying down debt is like a 6 percent or whatever you pay in interest guaranteed return that won't take 40 years to realize. I wouldn't totally neglect retirement, but debt should be the first priority.

401k is taxed as ordinary art income when you retire. Taxes are just deferred and if you need the money before retirement you are penalized.

ClubberLang wrote:

estefanchanning wrote:Always contribute. You can invest the money in your 401k and the investments are not taxed at all. If you invested most other ways you'd have to pay CG taxes.

Basically, 401ks are investment vehicles. Always contribute the max...In my opinion.

Damn, that's some pretty poor advice. Like you literally have no clue here.

Anyway, without an employer match, paying down debt is like a 6 percent or whatever you pay in interest guaranteed return that won't take 40 years to realize. I wouldn't totally neglect retirement, but debt should be the first priority.

401k is taxed as ordinary art income when you retire. Taxes are just deferred and if you need the money before retirement you are penalized.

I was thinking Roth 401. But same idea applies to regular 401k to be honest. While investment returns are poor now, building your deferred tax account up will be highly beneficial when investments go up. See Mitt Romney

Also, fuck you.

estefanchanning wrote:

ClubberLang wrote:

estefanchanning wrote:Always contribute. You can invest the money in your 401k and the investments are not taxed at all. If you invested most other ways you'd have to pay CG taxes.

Basically, 401ks are investment vehicles. Always contribute the max...In my opinion.

Damn, that's some pretty poor advice. Like you literally have no clue here.

Anyway, without an employer match, paying down debt is like a 6 percent or whatever you pay in interest guaranteed return that won't take 40 years to realize. I wouldn't totally neglect retirement, but debt should be the first priority.

401k is taxed as ordinary art income when you retire. Taxes are just deferred and if you need the money before retirement you are penalized.

I was thinking Roth 401. But same idea applies to regular 401k to be honest. While investment returns are poor now, building your deferred tax account up will be highly beneficial when investments go up. See Mitt Romney

Also, fuck you.

Ok then. 240k+ debt is a lot, and 6% interest grows quick. Maybe 240k isn't the number, but at some point investing in 401k becomes asinine with a significant debt Load.

estefanchanning wrote:

ClubberLang wrote:

estefanchanning wrote:Always contribute. You can invest the money in your 401k and the investments are not taxed at all. If you invested most other ways you'd have to pay CG taxes.

Basically, 401ks are investment vehicles. Always contribute the max...In my opinion.

Damn, that's some pretty poor advice. Like you literally have no clue here.

Anyway, without an employer match, paying down debt is like a 6 percent or whatever you pay in interest guaranteed return that won't take 40 years to realize. I wouldn't totally neglect retirement, but debt should be the first priority.

401k is taxed as ordinary art income when you retire. Taxes are just deferred and if you need the money before retirement you are penalized.

I was thinking Roth 401. But same idea applies to regular 401k to be honest. While investment returns are poor now, building your deferred tax account up will be highly beneficial when investments go up. See Mitt Romney

Also, fuck you.

You are weird. What the hell does Mitt Romney have to do with anything? Are you 12? By any objective measure "investment returns" have been pretty outstanding for nearly a decade.

Your clarification actually makes you seem even more financially illiterate than I first assumed.

Above fight aside getting guaranteed return of 5-6% by paying down your debt is pretty good.

Financially it would make sense to pay all of that debt off first, then simply replace your monthly payments and to savings. You should be able to catch up with what you would have saved if you didn't pay down debt after not terribly long, especially when you consider that any returns youd make on savings otherwise would need to be discounted by loan interest.

But, assuming this is biglaw we are talking about, you probably won't be at your job/income level for long. So the above doesn't fit 100%. I don't fault anyone who prefers to do hybrid pay down loans/save some too. That's where personal finance comes in. Some people sleep better with more money in the bank, even if it's not financially optimal.

Your investment and debt relief strategy depends on a variety of factors. Your current debt balance and your interest rate as you provided, but also your payment plan (are you paying it all down or on income-based), your salary and any particular investment strategies you may be inclined to with regards to risk and taxes. Kinda hard to advise a one size fits all.

I'm hardly an expert and could be way wrong, but if you're in biglaw, I do think you really try to max out your traditional 401k. At a 180k firm (unless I'm missing something), you'll be in at least the 28% federal tax bracket after your stub year. If you're single and contribute the maximum to your 401k ($18k per year), that saves you over $5k in federal taxes alone each year. So the relevant comparison isn't interest rate versus what you think you could get in the market for the same amount of money; it's interest rate versus what you think you could get in the market after getting a bonus $5k+ to invest. I think that changes the picture.

(Big disclaimer: Have never had a 401k/possibly don't know what I'm talking about)

Always diversify and do both. If you have no near future large purchases that will need credit and have no cash flow issues, make larger contributions to your IRA. ROI on the stock market over the next 20-30 years will probably be around 10%, so it is a better investment than paying down debt at 6% (ignoring other possible investments you could make with the cash). I recommend to invest at least 5% to your IRA and pay down your debt with the rest of your extra cash. If we happen to have a mini plunge in the stock market, up your contribution to about 7% for a while. If you plan on making a big purchase (real-estate), just contribute 2-3% as you want to lower your debt and have more cash. I personally will contribute about 10% into my IRA even though there is no match as I will still have plenty to pay off my debt over the next 2 years. I don't plan on buying anything over the next two years and have a decent savings account to protect me for a few months in case I lose my job.

Of course, investing in the stock market does not work if you freak out when we have our next recession and sell everything. If you do freak out like many did in 2009, your ROI will be shit and you should have just paid down your debt. So, if you are risk averse and are afraid of the stock market, just pay down your debt.

Anonymous User wrote:Always diversify and do both. . .ROI on the stock market over the next 20-30 years will probably be around 10%, so it is a better investment than paying down debt at 6% (ignoring other possible investments you could make with the cash).

I agree with a great deal of your post, but historical returns of the stock market average closer to 7% rather than 10%**, and that can actually make a substantial difference if you are debating paying off loans at 6% (or 6.8% like some student loans are nowadays). Obvious disclaimer of past performance =/= future performance, but I would tend to lean conservative on estimations of market returns to play it safe anyway.

**unless you aren't counting inflation in that number, which might push your 10% down on actual gains closer to 7.

Pay down your debt first. That's a guaranteed 6% rate of return. The alternative is a potential, but by no means guaranteed, 7% rate of return in the market.

Anonymous User wrote:Is there any reason to contribute to my 401k if I still have 240k in student loans accruing at 5% interest? Employer does not match.

Yes, max out your 401(k) and still make aggressive payments on your student loans. The tax benefits of contributing to your 401(k) are just too great to pass up. I'm assuming you're in Biglaw and therefore making enough money to do both.

The reasons why you should contribute to your 401(k):

Tax Savings Today. You'll save at today's marginal rate (i.e. the tax rate on the last dollar you earn). If you're in NYC Biglaw, that's a rate that is likely over 40%. Apply the tax savings against your student loans. If your a corporate lawyer, you'll likely learn that a "tax delayed is a tax not paid" from your tax colleagues.
Tax Arbitrage. When you withdraw the money in the future, you'll pay income taxes at your effective rate. That's because when you withdraw the money, some will be in the 0% bracket, some in the 10% bracket, etc as you fill up the lower bracket buckets. Your effective rate will be substantially lower than your marginal rate (even if tax rates go up). You get to keep the difference.
Retiring to Low Tax State. If you retire to a state with no income tax (like Florida or Texas), you won't be paying any state income tax on the withdrawals at all. If you're working in a place like NYC or SF, that's a winning proposition to avoid state and city taxes while you're working and pay no taxes in retirement.
You only get to take advantage of tax-protected space once. As you likely know, if you don't contribute this year you can't make up that contribution later. Again, assuming a Biglaw salary, maxing out $18K isn't going to be that big of a deal to you. In the meantime, you'll be making sure that money is in the market and working for you. When you look at those long term graphs showing the power of compound interest, for each year you don't contribute you're effectively deleting the last year of return on the far right of the graph.
The 10% Penalty Isn't That Bad. If a total disaster occurred, you can still access the 401(k) money. Would it suck? Yes. You'd have to pay a 10% penalty. But don't plan your life expecting the unlikely scenarios to happen. The risk of contributing and having the money locked into your 401(k) just isn't that great.

I hope the real answer is clear here. You should be doing both aggressively. I hope you're living like a law student. If so, you'll be able to knock out that debt pretty quickly. Good luck!

Isn't this issue complicated by the IBR plan? OP gets 7% return from stock market and just pays 10% income for 20 years. Then all of a sudden he didn't have to pay the loans and has a massive investment waiting for him.

Not sure this is right but I'd like someone's perspective

Personally I would put something into your 401k. I am not at a match firm either, but I am doing 10% and paying down my loans. I don't have over $200k in debt though. Still, even if you're over $200k in debt, putting something into 401k pre-tax makes sense. Talk to a financial planner

In case it's not clear by the lack of consensus in this thread, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. At the end of the day, putting money in the 401k as opposed to loans will (likely) maximize your net worth in the long run, while putting money into the loans will give you relatively more liquidity and the peace of mind of being debt-free sooner. Choose a balance between the two that makes sense for you.

Some relevant factors: do you plan to refinance? are you considering PSLF? are you currently in big law, and if so, do you feel confident enough that you like the job enough to stay for 6-8 yrs? even if you want to stay for that long, will they let you? or are you looking at a shorter horizon (either voluntarily or not)? how much do you plan to make afterwards? will you be able to service your debt payments with your expected salary in your next job? what does your safety net look like? how stressed do you feel about your debt load? do you place a higher value on short term flexibility or security re: your post-retirement income?

Biglaw Investor wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Is there any reason to contribute to my 401k if I still have 240k in student loans accruing at 5% interest? Employer does not match.

Yes, max out your 401(k) and still make aggressive payments on your student loans. The tax benefits of contributing to your 401(k) are just too great to pass up. I'm assuming you're in Biglaw and therefore making enough money to do both.

The reasons why you should contribute to your 401(k):

Tax Savings Today. You'll save at today's marginal rate (i.e. the tax rate on the last dollar you earn). If you're in NYC Biglaw, that's a rate that is likely over 40%. Apply the tax savings against your student loans. If your a corporate lawyer, you'll likely learn that a "tax delayed is a tax not paid" from your tax colleagues.
Tax Arbitrage. When you withdraw the money in the future, you'll pay income taxes at your effective rate. That's because when you withdraw the money, some will be in the 0% bracket, some in the 10% bracket, etc as you fill up the lower bracket buckets. Your effective rate will be substantially lower than your marginal rate (even if tax rates go up). You get to keep the difference.
Retiring to Low Tax State. If you retire to a state with no income tax (like Florida or Texas), you won't be paying any state income tax on the withdrawals at all. If you're working in a place like NYC or SF, that's a winning proposition to avoid state and city taxes while you're working and pay no taxes in retirement.
You only get to take advantage of tax-protected space once. As you likely know, if you don't contribute this year you can't make up that contribution later. Again, assuming a Biglaw salary, maxing out $18K isn't going to be that big of a deal to you. In the meantime, you'll be making sure that money is in the market and working for you. When you look at those long term graphs showing the power of compound interest, for each year you don't contribute you're effectively deleting the last year of return on the far right of the graph.
The 10% Penalty Isn't That Bad. If a total disaster occurred, you can still access the 401(k) money. Would it suck? Yes. You'd have to pay a 10% penalty. But don't plan your life expecting the unlikely scenarios to happen. The risk of contributing and having the money locked into your 401(k) just isn't that great.

I hope the real answer is clear here. You should be doing both aggressively. I hope you're living like a law student. If so, you'll be able to knock out that debt pretty quickly. Good luck!

It's incredible how few people mentioned the tax benefits of maxing an IRA 401(k) while in biglaw. If you're in biglaw, given that statistically speaking you won't be there long, the tax benefits associated with maxing out your 401(k) are phenomenal. And if you're in biglaw, you have enough money to max your IRA and to aggressively pay down loans. i refi'd my loans at the crazy first republic 1.9% rate and immediately started stashing money in my 401(k), and unless I'm missing something huge, I can't see there being any other way to use a biglaw salary.

If you're not in biglaw and have 240k of debt, idk, pray for loan forgiveness or something and may the force be with you. can't even imagine trying to pay that off except via paye/pslf/winning the lottery. can people making 60k even scrape together enough money to pay the interest accruing on a 240k loan?

v5junior wrote:In case it's not clear by the lack of consensus in this thread, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. At the end of the day, putting money in the 401k as opposed to loans will (likely) maximize your net worth in the long run, while putting money into the loans will give you relatively more liquidity and the peace of mind of being debt-free sooner. Choose a balance between the two that makes sense for you.

Some relevant factors: do you plan to refinance? are you considering PSLF? are you currently in big law, and if so, do you feel confident enough that you like the job enough to stay for 6-8 yrs? even if you want to stay for that long, will they let you? or are you looking at a shorter horizon (either voluntarily or not)? how much do you plan to make afterwards? will you be able to service your debt payments with your expected salary in your next job? what does your safety net look like? how stressed do you feel about your debt load? do you place a higher value on short term flexibility or security re: your post-retirement income?

How does the length of employment at biglaw and future salary come into play here? If one is concerned with maximizing net worth, isn't 401k the right answer regardless of how much one makes?

spyke123 wrote:

v5junior wrote:In case it's not clear by the lack of consensus in this thread, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. At the end of the day, putting money in the 401k as opposed to loans will (likely) maximize your net worth in the long run, while putting money into the loans will give you relatively more liquidity and the peace of mind of being debt-free sooner. Choose a balance between the two that makes sense for you.

Some relevant factors: do you plan to refinance? are you considering PSLF? are you currently in big law, and if so, do you feel confident enough that you like the job enough to stay for 6-8 yrs? even if you want to stay for that long, will they let you? or are you looking at a shorter horizon (either voluntarily or not)? how much do you plan to make afterwards? will you be able to service your debt payments with your expected salary in your next job? what does your safety net look like? how stressed do you feel about your debt load? do you place a higher value on short term flexibility or security re: your post-retirement income?

How does the length of employment at biglaw and future salary come into play here? If one is concerned with maximizing net worth, isn't 401k the right answer regardless of how much one makes?

length of time in biglaw is a factor because you're in a way higher tax bracket during your time in biglaw than you likely ever will be again. many post-biglaw lawyers are lucky to make six figures. so get the tax benefits now and take the ira distributions when you're in a lower tax bracket.

bruinfan10 wrote:

spyke123 wrote:

v5junior wrote:In case it's not clear by the lack of consensus in this thread, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. At the end of the day, putting money in the 401k as opposed to loans will (likely) maximize your net worth in the long run, while putting money into the loans will give you relatively more liquidity and the peace of mind of being debt-free sooner. Choose a balance between the two that makes sense for you.

Some relevant factors: do you plan to refinance? are you considering PSLF? are you currently in big law, and if so, do you feel confident enough that you like the job enough to stay for 6-8 yrs? even if you want to stay for that long, will they let you? or are you looking at a shorter horizon (either voluntarily or not)? how much do you plan to make afterwards? will you be able to service your debt payments with your expected salary in your next job? what does your safety net look like? how stressed do you feel about your debt load? do you place a higher value on short term flexibility or security re: your post-retirement income?

How does the length of employment at biglaw and future salary come into play here? If one is concerned with maximizing net worth, isn't 401k the right answer regardless of how much one makes?

length of time in biglaw is a factor because you're in a way higher tax bracket during your time in biglaw than you likely ever will be again. many post-biglaw lawyers are lucky to make six figures. so get the tax benefits now and take the ira distributions when you're in a lower tax bracket.

Right so I understand that it is relevant whether you are in biglaw now (more tax benefits) but why does it matter how long you plan to stay in biglaw? You should be contributing to 401k regardless.

spyke123 wrote: Right so I understand that it is relevant whether you are in biglaw now (more tax benefits) but why does it matter how long you plan to stay in biglaw? You should be contributing to 401k regardless.

If, e.g., you are in biglaw for 3 years and intend to go to back home to a small law firm paying 60k a year or some other non-PSLF eligible/low-paying job, I think you should consider dumping a ton of money into the loans to make your payments serviceable after you exit.

spyke123 wrote:Right so I understand that it is relevant whether you are in biglaw now (more tax benefits) but why does it matter how long you plan to stay in biglaw? You should be contributing to 401k regardless.

In essence the choice is between a guaranteed ~6.3% return versus a speculative market return of 9% or whatever. That's why it's not as simple as "you should be contributing to 401k regardless." Also see the what helps you sleep at night thing and personal finance is personal finance thing. Can't fault a person for just wanting to be debt free.

People need to understand that 401(k)'s aren't magical vehicles that simply produce money. Your 401(k) money is invested. So, even though there may be tremendous tax benefits/your firm matches your contribution, the market still has to spit out your returns. Not the case with your student debt. If you throw $1K at your $35K, 7.2% loan, you've achieved a guaranteed 7.2% return on that $1K.

hangingtree wrote:

spyke123 wrote:Right so I understand that it is relevant whether you are in biglaw now (more tax benefits) but why does it matter how long you plan to stay in biglaw? You should be contributing to 401k regardless.

In essence the choice is between a guaranteed ~6.3% return versus a speculative market return of 9% or whatever. That's why it's not as simple as "you should be contributing to 401k regardless." Also see the what helps you sleep at night thing and personal finance is personal finance thing. Can't fault a person for just wanting to be debt free.

People need to understand that 401(k)'s aren't magical vehicles that simply produce money. Your 401(k) money is invested. So, even though there may be tremendous tax benefits/your firm matches your contribution, the market still has to spit out your returns. Not the case with your student debt. If you throw $1K at your $35K, 7.2% loan, you've achieved a guaranteed 7.2% return on that $1K.

I agree with you. I was just trying to simplify (market return is guaranteed and is greater than interest on loan) the hypo to make a point. I agree that market returns can fluctuate and some people rather be debt free.