Correct. I have a zero balance in traditional IRA and x balance in Roth, both with Vanguard.
And that is the key. Zero balance in traditional.
Way back in 2006/7 I put around $4000 each year x 2 years to non deductible Ira to plan for the big Roth conversion in 2010. Than I changed my mind.
So that non deductible ira just sits there. It's around $12k now but pointless for me to do a massive conversion in 2015 since my deductible IRA will be taxed so much if I were to convert.
I am not completely sold on Roths anyways. That's why I didn't do the conversion with the 2010 tax law to pay the taxes over 2 years.
The government can do whatever they want in the future.
They already have higher income people pay higher Medicare taxes if they make more than 175k a year even though Medicare was supposed to be the same rate for everyone.
Who knows in the future govt will limit withdrawals from Roths. Say if u with drawl more than $50k from Roth. Congress can always pass laws saying they can impose a "fee" of 10% to excess with drawl over $50k with a Roth.
Never trust what the govt can do when they are spending other people money.
Just look at the ridiculous prop 30 California bill that was passed in November 2012. Yet govt made the new tax retroactive to Jan 1 2012. So richer people ended up paying more taxes retroactively on a bill that didn't become law until the voters approved it.
To me that sort of BS should be outlaw. Imagine having to pay extra taxes retroactively on a bill had wasn't approved until the end of the year.
If govt is desperate they will attack "rich" Roth IRA owners as well by being creative to yank more money away. Remember the US constitution grants congress the power to tax. That's how Obamacare was saved in 2012. That's how the retroactive prop 30 tax was legal because of a 1994 Supreme Court ruling.
I wouldn't go blindly thinking your Roth IRA is fully free from taxes ever again.