| Course | GF550 Retirement Planning |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 4 |
| Paper type | Qualified plan comparison |
| Length | About 950 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MS in Finance |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for GF550 Unit 4
Five Places for the Same Take-Home Dollar: A Unit 4 Qualified Plan Comparison for a 44-Year-Old Professional
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
GF550: Retirement Planning
Unit 4 Qualified Plan Comparison
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The client and every figure are composite and illustrative; dollar limits and income ranges are those published for 2025, and the article and publications cited are real.
The Client
The client is single, 44, and earns $165,000 as an operations manager. Her employer's 401(k) allows both pre-tax and Roth deferrals and adds 50 cents for each dollar she defers, up to 6 percent of salary, which she already collects. She expects to retire at about 65, with retirement income likely taxed at 22 percent at the margin. Today, after the standard deduction, her taxable income of about $149,000 sits in the 24 percent bracket.
The Comparison Method
Each vehicle is compared at the same cost to her take-home pay. A $10,000 pre-tax deferral reduces take-home pay by $7,600, since it saves $2,400 of tax at 24 percent. So the comparison asks what $7,600 of take-home pay becomes after twenty years at a 6 percent return, after all taxes, in each vehicle.
The Five Vehicles
1. Pre-tax 401(k) deferral. Going in: $10,000 deducted from taxable pay. During growth: no tax. Coming out: taxed as ordinary income. After twenty years, $10,000 grows to about $32,071; after tax at 22 percent, about $25,016.
2. Roth 401(k) deferral. Going in: $7,600 from after-tax pay. During growth: no tax. Coming out: tax-free once she is 59 and a half and the account has existed for five years. Value after twenty years: about $24,374.
3. Traditional IRA. Because she is covered by a workplace plan and her income is well above the 2025 phase-out range for single filers, $79,000 to $89,000, her contribution would not be deductible (Internal Revenue Service, 2024b). The nondeductible amount becomes basis in the IRA, tracked on Form 8606, so only the earnings are taxed when withdrawn (Internal Revenue Service, 2024a). A nondeductible $7,600 grows tax-deferred to about $24,374, but the earnings, about $16,774, are taxed at 22 percent on withdrawal, leaving about $20,684.
4. Roth IRA. Eligibility depends on modified adjusted gross income, which phases out direct Roth IRA contributions for single filers between $150,000 and $165,000 in 2025 (Internal Revenue Service, 2024b). The annual IRA limit is $7,000, so the comparison here uses that amount where she qualifies. Growth and qualified withdrawals are tax-free, the same as the Roth 401(k).
5. Taxable brokerage account. $7,600 invested in a stock fund paying 2 percent dividends, taxed at 15 percent each year, with the rest of the return as unrealized growth. After twenty years the account is worth about $23,031, and selling it triggers 15 percent tax on the gain above a basis of about $12,202, leaving about $21,407.
The Ranking
For equal take-home cost after twenty years:
1. Pre-tax 401(k): about $25,016.
2. Roth 401(k) or Roth IRA: about $24,374.
3. Taxable account: about $21,407.
4. Nondeductible traditional IRA: about $20,684.
The pre-tax deferral wins because she saves tax at 24 percent today and expects to pay 22 percent later. The Roth options are close behind. The nondeductible IRA is the weakest, because it turns what would have been lightly taxed capital gains into ordinary income.
The most useful finding is not the ranking but an interaction: pre-tax 401(k) deferrals lower her modified adjusted gross income, so deferring the full $23,500 pre-tax brings her to about $141,500 and makes her eligible for a full $7,000 Roth IRA, which Roth 401(k) deferrals would not.
Why the Interaction Matters
If she made all her 401(k) deferrals as Roth contributions, her modified adjusted gross income would remain about $165,000, the top of the phase-out range, and she could not contribute to a Roth IRA directly. By deferring the full $23,500 pre-tax, she both captures the 24 percent deduction and opens the Roth IRA. The result is a mix of pre-tax and tax-free savings, which protects her if tax rates in retirement turn out higher than she expects.
Tax Diversification
Research on where to hold assets when both taxable and tax-deferred accounts are available finds that the choice of account can matter as much as the choice of investment, and that holding some savings in each type gives flexibility in retirement (Dammon et al., 2004). A retiree with both pre-tax and Roth balances can draw from pre-tax accounts up to the top of a low bracket and from Roth accounts above it, managing taxable income year by year.
Sensitivity to the Retirement Tax Rate
If her retirement rate turned out to be 24 percent, the same as today, pre-tax and Roth would produce identical results, about $24,374 each. If it were 32 percent, the Roth would win by a wide margin. Because no one knows future tax law, splitting contributions guards against being entirely wrong.
Two Practical Cautions
First, the Roth IRA eligibility depends on her income staying within range after deferrals; a large bonus could push modified adjusted gross income above $150,000 and reduce the allowed contribution, so she should check before contributing late in the year. Second, the employer match is always made with pre-tax dollars under this plan, so even a fully Roth deferral strategy would leave her with some pre-tax balance.
Recommendation
1. Defer the full $23,500 to the 401(k) on a pre-tax basis.
2. Contribute $7,000 a year directly to a Roth IRA, which the pre-tax deferral makes possible.
3. Invest any further saving in a low-turnover taxable index fund rather than a nondeductible traditional IRA.
4. Revisit the split if her income rises above the Roth IRA range even after pre-tax deferrals.
References
Dammon, R. M., Spatt, C. S., & Zhang, H. H. (2004). Optimal asset location and allocation with taxable and tax-deferred investing. The Journal of Finance, 59(3), 999-1037. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2004.00655.x
Internal Revenue Service. (2024a). Contributions to individual retirement arrangements (IRAs) (Publication 590-A). U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Internal Revenue Service. (2024b). 2025 amounts relating to retirement plans and IRAs, as adjusted for changes in cost-of-living (Notice 2024-80). U.S. Department of the Treasury.
The Purdue Global GF550 Unit 4 instructions
Unit 4 in GF550 asks you to compare retirement savings vehicles for one client. Describe the client's income, bracket today, expected bracket in retirement and workplace plan features. Compare each vehicle at the same cost to take-home pay, not the same contribution, so taxes are treated fairly. For each, state the tax treatment going in, during growth and coming out, the eligibility rules at the client's income for the plan year, and the after-tax value after a stated period. Rank the vehicles and explain why the ranking falls as it does. Look for interactions, such as one contribution changing eligibility for another. Test the ranking against a different retirement tax rate. End with specific contribution steps. Cite IRS publications and research on account choice in APA 7.
How this GF550 Unit 4 example is built
The example's client profile includes her employer match and a 22 percent expected retirement bracket. A method section explains the equal take-home cost comparison. Five numbered vehicles each describe treatment going in, during growth and coming out, with the IRA phase-out ranges cited from the IRS notice and the treatment of nondeductible basis from Publication 590-A. The ranking places the pre-tax deferral first, and the highlighted sentence identifies how pre-tax deferrals lower modified adjusted gross income enough to open a Roth IRA. A section on why that matters builds a mix of pre-tax and tax-free savings, followed by Dammon, Spatt and Zhang on account location. A sensitivity section tests 24 and 32 percent retirement rates, two practical cautions follow, and four contribution steps close.
Reading the GF550 Unit 4 grading rubric
In GF550, most of the credit for this paper follows a fair comparison method and correct after-tax values for each vehicle. Comparing equal take-home costs rather than equal contributions is the step that separates sound work from flawed work. Eligibility rules must be applied correctly at the client's income for the stated year, including phase-outs. The next share rewards explaining the ranking in terms of marginal rates now and later. Finding an interaction between vehicles shows analytical depth that instructors in the MS in Finance program value highly. A sensitivity test on the retirement tax rate and concrete contribution steps earn the remaining credit, with APA 7 references to IRS guidance and research.
GF550 Unit 4 help from the desk
A frequent GF550 Unit 4 mistake is comparing $10,000 pre-tax with $10,000 Roth, which ignores that the Roth contribution costs more take-home pay. Students also overlook income limits, recommending a deductible IRA or direct Roth IRA the client cannot use. Nondeductible traditional IRAs are presented as attractive without noting that earnings are taxed as ordinary income. Taxable accounts are modeled without any tax drag. The interaction between pre-tax deferrals and Roth IRA eligibility is rarely noticed. Recommendations stay general. For any client your case describes, keep the method: equal take-home cost, correct eligibility, after-tax values, a ranking explained by tax rates, interactions and specific steps.
Get a GF550 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Include the household your GF550 Unit 4 case describes, the plan features and tax year your instructor specified, and the rubric. Each vehicle is compared on tax treatment at your client's actual rates, ineligible options are removed by rule, and the recommendation says what would reverse it. Your first custom sample is free; 24-48h is the norm. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More GF550 papers and MS in Finance samples
- GF550 Unit 1: Retirement Income Rule Discussion Post
- GF550 Unit 2: Client Fact Summary With Gaps
- GF550 Unit 3: Retirement Needs and Gap Projection
- GF550 Unit 5: Benefit Timing Analysis
- GF550 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- GF550 Unit 7: Employer Plan Brief
- GF550 Unit 8: Distribution Strategy Memo
- GF550 Unit 9: Longevity and Sequence Analysis
- GF550 Unit 10: Client Retirement Plan
- GF540 Unit 4: Bond Pricing and Yields Exercise
- GF530 Unit 4: DuPont Ratio Decomposition of Two Firms
- GF520 Unit 4: Packaging Line Capital Budgeting
- GF510 Unit 4: Pool Maker Risk Register
GF550 Unit 4 questions, answered
Is a Roth always better for younger clients?
Not automatically. A Roth wins when the tax rate at withdrawal is expected to exceed the rate today, which is often true early in a career but not always. The sample's client is mid-career in a high bracket, so pre-tax deferral edges ahead. Your case may point the other way, and the paper should show the two rates rather than rely on age.
Where does an employer match fit in the comparison?
Ahead of everything else, because a match is an immediate return no other vehicle offers. The sample assumes the client defers at least enough to capture the full match before money goes anywhere else, and notes that in this composite plan the match is deposited to the pre-tax side. Once the match is secured, the rate comparison decides where the next dollar belongs.
Where can I find a free GF550 Unit 4 sample paper?
A complete GF550 Unit 4 qualified plan comparison is on this page, ranking five vehicles at equal take-home cost for a 44-year-old professional, with eligibility rules, sensitivity and APA 7 references.
Why compare at equal take-home cost?
A $10,000 pre-tax deferral costs only $7,600 of take-home pay at a 24 percent rate, while a $10,000 Roth contribution costs the full $10,000. Comparing equal contributions would favor the Roth unfairly.
Why is the nondeductible traditional IRA last?
Its earnings are taxed as ordinary income when withdrawn, so growth that would have been taxed at 15 percent in a taxable account is taxed at 22 percent instead, and no deduction offsets it.