Jughead

Meh.... M-word outdoes that in the first 3 minutes of any speech or interview....

Yes, you can (2 separate IRAs, up to $5.5K ea.). Not really complicated (the rules may be, but the implementation is simple).

I only got one assignment over a 21+ year career that I didn't want. I never signed for the ADSC (which was largely irrelevant, since my bonus ADSC was longer) and forced them to change my "voluntary" status (also irrelevant, in the sense that off I went on the PCS). Beyond making me feel better about not "accepting" anything, my reasoning was that if I suddenly found myself over the next two years in a position of wanting/needing to shed ADSCs, I'd have one fewer to fight. All about nothing, as it turns out in my case--but sounds like you're in a different position & actively trying to get out from under ADSC(s).... Make sure you know exactly what you did (and didn't) sign; if push comes to shove, make them show it to you (via the ADC). Good luck.

Thanks, Cliff....

Jesus, how does an embarrassment (kindest word I could come up with) of that magnitude get "professionally resolved"? Did the offender offer to commit seppuku...?

Indeed. Not a first for the Brits, though: [no idea of authenticity, but the underlying point remains]

No idea on HRT, but when I was handed my flight records at outprocessing (retirement), it has the reports all the way back to (but not including) UPT....

$5 bucks says the "fix" will be to ban all whiteboards or signs of any kind outside of rooms for anything besides official use.... (DISCLAIMER: Not a Zoomie....)

What C17Driver said. Roth IRA & Roth TSP have nothing to do with one another. TSP is mostly like a 401(k) (which is NOT an IRA); when looking for parallels, that's what you should compare it to initially--you'll get the right answer most of the time.

No limit, at least until the law allowing it is repealed/superseded. The Roth limits predate the back door; the back door simply didn't address the limits, so they're still in place. And, you're right, in effect, there is no limit, you just have an additional hoop to jump through to keep the IRS happy. No, it doesn't really make sense....

Having one, two, or seventeen Roth and/or traditional IRAs is irrelevant. So long as you observe annual limits, you can make your contributions to a single account, to a different account each year, to multiple accounts in a given year, mix/match new accounts with existing ones, etc. As to your question, Nunya nailed it (along with your mom's back door, evidently)--since you seem skeptical, let me try from a different POV: There are two types of Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs): Roth IRA & IRA (aka "traditional IRA"). Unless you're trying to do something complicated (contributing or owning real estate, precious metals, options, etc.), contributing to your IRA(s) is pretty simple: find an authorized custodian (pretty much any brokerage, though there are certainly other avenues), open the account, make your contributions, get rich slowly. While there are two types of IRAs, sometimes it's easier to think in three categories: deductible contributions; non-deductible contributions; and Roth (non-deductible) contributions. The first two are simply contributions to a traditional IRA, and deductibility/non-deductibility is (mostly) determined by income limits. There is NO income limit for making an IRA contribution; there ARE income limits for contributing to a Roth and/or for making a deductible (traditional IRA) contribution. Also, as you've discovered, those limits go way down when married/filing separately. Loophole ("back door") for the last 8-ish years allows anyone--regardless of income--to convert from a traditional to a Roth IRA. Make contribution to IRA, convert to Roth, simple. If your contribution (or portion of it) was deductible, you'll pay ordinary income tax on it; you'll also be taxed on any gains/deduct any losses you may have realized on the converted amount. This all applies to any existing balances you may choose to convert as well. Your custodian absolutely knows how to do this and will have you sign a form; only decisions you have to make is how much of the balance to convert and if you want them to figure the taxable amount or if you want to do it yourself So, for just about anyone wanting to contribute to an IRA but who exceeds the deductibility limit, it's a no-brainier: you can't deduct it anyway, so get it into the Roth via this method. If you can deduct your contributions, it's much more complicated, since you have to evaluate the current value of the deduction vs the assumed future value of Roth treatments--in your case, it sounds like you've already done that and want the Roth (which is probably the smart answer for most military folks). Either way, based on what you've told us, this sounds like what you want to do. Hope this helps! ETA: minor clarification

Maybe it's all that acid I dropped back in the 60s (no offense, Huggy), but that sounds remarkably similar to what we then-young captains were told ca. 1995. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure how that worked out.... I hope this sticks. I'm not holding my breath. My advice to any young CGO is to take it with a grain of salt until there's some hard evidence that it's truly the new normal.

This. Pro tip: also talk to the ADC beforehand.

Beware of Brazilian women inviting you to perform oral sex on them....

ThreeHoler neglected to answer this one (perhaps feeling it was self-evident): NO. Otherwise, what he said. I'll add that your first month of CZTE entitlement will likely result in under-contributing to your TSP insofar as the tax exempt portion is concerned; couple that with the answer to your question on Finance's clue level, and you'll have to open a case file with DFAS to get it un-fucked (ask me how I know*...). Another consideration is that your deferred (i.e., "normal") contributions are taken "first," from whatever portion of your pay is not tax exempt (if you're an officer, typically applies at O4 / 14-ish years on flight pay), then the tax exempt, up to your chosen percentages. As a result, you could end up limiting your deferred contributions (probably not what you want) if your exempt contributions exceed $33.5K ($51K - $17.5K). If you're planning on truly maxing it out, you need to carefully calculate your contributions to keep the two categories in balance. ETA: *ThreeHoler is correct about not being able to make lump-sum contributions, but if you find yourself in this situation, it's the one case where you CAN "write a check" to cover the contributions that should have been withheld (so don't spend it!!).

Look closely at your HUD-1; it probably labels the NBofKC credit as "lender credit" or other non-descript name. Point is, you paid the funding fee, not your lender; the VA collected the funding fee in connection with guaranteeing your loan; and your lender reduced their fees by $X, in a (technically) separate transaction between you & NBofKC (VA has no dog in the fight). The fact that the $X matches your funding fee is irrelevant. The amount of that lender credit is part of the loan pricing--it could be less than your fees; until the "mortgage meltdown" and subsequent regulations, it could have been more resulting in cash-out to the borrower. The tax implications of the lender credit will be reflected in your cost basis (i.e., will lower it) when you ultimately sell your house; the funding fee is deductible in the amount indicated on the 1098. DISCLAIMER: Not a tax lawyer, and the "some guy on the internet told me..." defense won't get you far with the IRS; rely on this to the extent it gives you a place to start... and at your own risk! ETA: What Hoss said....

Did you get lost on your way to the 'Deid thread...?

Wait--I thought you rotorheads sneered at anyone who needed an airport to begin with....

And, really, they're all 1s...: the ones you would brag about, and the ones you wouldn't....

Aren't they the douches who got their panties in a wad over quoting articles & insisted we link to their site instead...? Quick, somebody slap a cease-and-desist letter on them....

We tried to warn Rainman that his anger issues were going to get the best of him someday....

In my case, pretty freakin' simple: I transported not one but two motorcycles on it. Additionally, it has two pairs of wheel chocks (front & rear) and tie-down points designed for motorcycles; transporting motorcycles is the purpose for which I bought it, and for which all modifications I've made to it have been designed. In the OP's case, I'm assuming his trailer is equally clearly a "motorcycle trailer," since he stated he bought it for a previous move but has since sold the motorcycle. If that's not the case, he may have a more uphill climb with TMO (which is already a PITA, as noted). He may need to prove his case (that it is a m/c trailer, was purchased and has previously been used for that purpose, etc.); so long as it is, in fact, a motorcycle trailer, he's good to go.... In the case of someone trying to say, "Look, it's a motorcyle trailer!" for a trailer that does not otherwise qualify as HHG, and who does not own or transport motorcycles on it, and which is not designed to transport motorcycles--i.e., which is not, in fact, a motorcycle trailer.... Well, now you're in the territory that ThreeHoler & brabus warned against--don't do it!

It doesn't stop being a motorcycle trailer because you put a non-motorcycle item in/on it. The JFTR language that includes the trailer in HHG is "and/or the associated trailer"--the "or" is the key part in this case. JFTR App. A., Pt. 1, "Household Goods (HHG)" definition, Para A.4.e. You will likely have to fight TMO, but you will be correct. My last three moves (2x PCS & retirement) were under the current rules [those who said you can "always" count a trailer are thinking of the previous rules, it's no longer true], and I had to do battle with 2 of the 3 TMOs I dealt with [and, hell, I had 2 motorcycles on the damn thing!]... twice each (inbound & outbound, though the outbound PCS didn't put up too much a fight, since they weren't going to be paying it).... That's why I know that particular JFTR definition so well. Point out to TMO that they're relying on the wrong paragraph (A.4.h) when they try to deny your "utility trailer," and that A.4.e. clearly defines your motorcycle trailer as HHG. Make them appeal it to the JPPSO if no one local will approve it--I had to do that twice, and they got it right 2 for 2.... EDIT: Clarification

Nah, my money's on Dukeorions--he wouldn't have to wait 5 months....

Wait.... They flew a BUFF to the moon? I'm confused....