Two retirees can hold the same balances across the same accounts, spend the same amount each year, and still watch their savings run out years apart. The variable that separates them is the order in which they tap the money. Drawing first from taxable accounts, then from tax-deferred accounts like a traditional IRA or 401(k), and last from a Roth is the conventional sequence, and its logic is straightforward: it keeps the most tax-advantaged dollars growing the longest while paying the tax bill in the cheapest order. But required distributions and the shape of a household’s tax brackets can bend that rule, which is why sequencing is a decision to revisit rather than set once.
What the default order is trying to accomplish
The three account types are taxed on entirely different schedules, and that is the whole game. A taxable brokerage account is taxed as it grows, on dividends and realized gains, so leaving money there offers no shelter to preserve. A traditional IRA or 401(k) grows untaxed until money is withdrawn, at which point the distribution is taxed as ordinary income. A Roth grows and is withdrawn tax-free in retirement, making it the most valuable dollar to keep untouched. The SEC’s investor-education service lays out these buckets, and the sequencing strategy simply follows the incentives they create.
Spending taxable money first lets the tax-deferred and Roth accounts keep compounding behind the shelter of their tax treatment. Spending the Roth last means the account with the most powerful benefit, tax-free growth, gets the longest runway. In between, the tax-deferred account is drawn down at ordinary-income rates the retiree can partly control by managing how much comes out in any given year. The result is not a larger pile of money but a longer-lasting one, because less of each year’s spending is lost to tax and more of the balance stays invested.
The strategy also shapes what heirs receive, a dimension the SEC’s retirement toolkit weighs alongside the basic tax treatment of each account. A Roth passed to a beneficiary generally carries its tax-free character forward, while a traditional IRA hands the beneficiary a future income-tax bill. Preserving the Roth therefore does double duty, stretching the owner’s own money and leaving the most tax-friendly asset behind.
Free retirement updates: Miss an enrollment or claim deadline and it may be gone. Our free Retirement Shield newsletter keeps readers ahead of the ones that matter. Get the free newsletter.
The rule that overrides the default: required distributions
The clean taxable-first order runs into a hard limit written into the tax code. The IRS requires owners of traditional IRAs and most workplace retirement plans to begin taking required minimum distributions starting at age 73, whether or not the retiree wants or needs the money. Those forced withdrawals are taxed as ordinary income, and skipping them triggers a steep excise penalty on the amount that should have come out.
That mandate reshapes the sequence. A retiree who spends only taxable money through their sixties can arrive at 73 with a large tax-deferred balance and a correspondingly large forced withdrawal, potentially pushing income into a higher bracket and raising the tax on everything, including the amount that determines certain Medicare premiums. The IRS notes in its guidance on required minimum distributions that Roth IRAs carry no such requirement during the owner’s lifetime, which is another reason the Roth is the account left for last.
The practical response is to look ahead rather than defer blindly. Some retirees deliberately take modest distributions from a tax-deferred account in their lower-income early retirement years, or convert portions to a Roth, precisely to shrink the balance that will later be forced out at a higher rate. That means the “correct” order is not always taxable-first in a literal sense; it is taxable-first with an eye on smoothing the tax-deferred account down before required distributions make the timing someone else’s choice.
Why the best sequence is a moving target
Bracket management is the reason the rule cannot be applied mechanically. In a year with unusually low income, pulling extra from a tax-deferred account can fill up a low bracket cheaply, even though the default order would say to spend taxable money instead. In a year with a large one-time gain or expense, the opposite may hold. The sequence that stretches savings the furthest is the one that keeps taxable income relatively even across retirement rather than spiking it late, and that requires adjusting the mix from year to year.
The interaction with a cash buffer matters too. A retiree who keeps near-term spending in cash can choose which account to refill from based on that year’s tax picture, rather than being forced to sell or withdraw at a bad moment. The account sequence and the cash tier work together: one decides the tax cost of a withdrawal, the other decides whether the withdrawal has to happen at all in a given year.
What sequencing cannot do is eliminate tax; it can only order it. The taxable-then-deferred-then-Roth default is a strong starting point because it respects how each account is taxed and preserves the most valuable dollars longest. But required distributions set a floor on tax-deferred withdrawals, and bracket management can justify pulling out of order in specific years. The retirees whose money lasts longest are usually not the ones who followed a fixed rule, but the ones who treated the withdrawal order as a yearly decision shaped by their own changing income.
This article was researched and drafted with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
More Financial Reading
