Retirees who missed a required minimum distribution from an IRA or qualified retirement plan face a 25% excise tax on the shortfall amount. That penalty drops to 10% if the missed withdrawal is corrected within a defined window, but the clock is already ticking for anyone who fell short in 2024 or 2025. The difference between a 25% hit and a 10% hit on a five-figure RMD shortfall can amount to thousands of dollars, and the rules governing the correction deadline carry hard cutoffs that many account holders do not fully understand.
Why the 25% RMD penalty carries an expiring escape hatch
The federal excise tax on RMD shortfalls is spelled out in Section 4974, which sets the default rate at 25% of the amount that should have been distributed but was not. The same statute provides a reduced 10% rate, but only when the account holder corrects the shortfall before the “correction window” closes. The IRS frames that window as roughly two years, though the precise statutory language is more specific and less forgiving than a simple calendar countdown.
Under the statutory definition of the correction window, the period begins when the Section 4974(a) tax is imposed and ends at the earliest of three events: a notice of deficiency from the IRS, an assessment of the tax, or the last day of the second taxable year after the year the tax was imposed. That “earliest of” structure is the detail that trips people up. A taxpayer who assumes a full two years of breathing room could lose the reduced rate if the IRS issues a deficiency notice or assessment sooner.
The practical question is whether filing proactively, before the IRS contacts a taxpayer, makes a measurable difference in securing the 10% rate. The statute itself supports that logic: because the correction window closes upon a notice of deficiency or assessment, a taxpayer who has already withdrawn the shortfall amount and filed Form 5329 before either event occurs would meet the statutory test. No publicly available IRS data breaks down how often the reduced rate is granted to proactive filers versus those who wait, but the statutory text makes the advantage of early action structurally clear.
Statutory text and IRS guidance align on the two-year correction frame
Three layers of federal authority confirm the penalty structure. The statute itself, Section 4974, establishes both the 25% default and the 10% reduced rate. The IRS FAQ page on required minimum distributions states that the reduced 10% rate applies if the shortfall is corrected within two years. And the Treasury Department’s Internal Revenue Bulletin 2024-19 described the excise tax framework and confirmed that correction by the end of the correction window reduces the tax from 25% to 10%.
The regulatory layer adds operational detail. Treasury regulations under Section 401, such as the rules on annuity and mortality assumptions, help determine how RMD amounts are calculated in the first place. While these rules do not change the excise tax percentages, they influence the size of any shortfall by defining how account balances are valued and how life expectancies are applied. A misinterpretation of those technical assumptions can create an unintentional shortfall even when a retiree believes they have complied.
Once a shortfall exists, the taxpayer’s interaction with the IRS becomes crucial. If the IRS identifies a missed RMD during an inquiry or examination, it may issue a formal notice of deficiency. That notice is one of the triggers that immediately closes the correction window, locking in the 25% rate unless the shortfall had already been corrected. Taxpayers can monitor their account status and correspondence through the IRS’s online account system, which shows balances, notices, and some penalty assessments. Staying current on this information reduces the risk of being surprised by a deficiency notice that cuts off access to the reduced rate.
How proactive correction works in practice
For retirees who discover a missed RMD on their own, the corrective steps are straightforward but time-sensitive. First, they must withdraw the shortfall amount from the affected IRA or plan. Second, they must file Form 5329 for the year in which the RMD was missed, reporting the excise tax and indicating that the shortfall has been corrected within the statutory window. Filing can occur with an original return or as a stand‑alone submission if the original return has already been filed.
In some cases, taxpayers still seek a waiver rather than relying solely on the reduced 10% rate. Historically, the IRS has had discretion to waive the excise tax entirely when the shortfall resulted from reasonable error and the taxpayer took steps to remedy it. While the statutory amendment that lowered the default rate from 50% to 25% narrowed the stakes, the waiver process remains relevant for those who correct late or who face unique hardship circumstances. Taxpayers and practitioners can track evolving administrative practices through the IRS’s bulletin archive, which compiles revenue rulings and procedures that may address penalty relief.
The key planning takeaway is that the correction window is not merely a two‑year grace period, but a race against whichever cutoff arrives first. Retirees who review their RMD calculations promptly, correct any shortfall, and file Form 5329 before the IRS raises the issue preserve access to the 10% rate by design. Waiting for an IRS notice, on the other hand, risks turning a fixable mistake into a permanently higher penalty.
Free for readers: The free Retirement Shield newsletter sends plain-English help keeping more of your money in retirement — the scams to dodge, the benefits you’re owed, and what’s changing with Social Security and Medicare, a couple times a week. Get the free newsletter.
