First, IRMAA doesn’t kick in until Medicare and you have to be at least 65 for Medicare. That means your Roth IRA distributions are probably going to be qualified if you have had the account open and funded for at least 5 tax years, which seems like by age 65.
You missed the point that Roths weren’t even available to make contributions to until 1998. Therefore, even if you were over 65 in 2002 (20 years ago), you couldn’t have had qualified Roth contributions, because the Roth account wouldn’t have been 5 years old until 2003. I guess you could call the difference of 1 year a nit, but you were the one who wanted to pick nits…
I suppose the tax code can say anything is part of MAGI
Yes, that’s my point. My response also said Income from qualified Roth withdrawals doesn’t currently count toward limits that are based on any type of MAGI. and Once Congress starts seeing people with significant qualified Roth income paying little/no taxes on SS and not paying IRMAA premiums, who knows how long it will take before qualified Roth income starts being counted in some of the MAGI modifications?
Whether Roth distributions are taxable or not won’t keep them from being added back in as part of MAGI, just like tax-free interest on municipal bonds is added back in when calculating IRMAA and taxability of SS. Given that Congress is going to need to make some rule changes on SS and Medicare in the next few years makes ‘tax-free’ Roth income ripe for adding back into MAGI, IMO.