WASHINGTON — As of September 2026, Americans who turned 73 this year continue to adjust retirement-income plans in response to the SECURE 2.0 law’s increase in the required minimum distribution (RMD) start age. Financial advisers, plan administrators and custodians say the change — modest in wording but complex in practice — remains materially meaningful for households balancing taxes, Social Security, Medicare premiums and pension choices.

What changed, who it affects and why it matters now

SECURE 2.0, enacted in late 2022, pushed back the RMD start age for many account owners. The cohort who reached age 73 in 2026 benefited from that shift and, in practice, has had an extra year to defer taxable withdrawals from traditional IRAs and 401(k)-type accounts. That single-year deferral continues to influence tax planning and retirement income sequencing in ways that are time-sensitive through the end of 2026.

Why this still matters in September 2026: the interplay between an extra year of deferral and other income tests — notably the taxation of Social Security and Medicare income-related monthly adjustment amounts (IRMAA) — means a one-year change can alter whether a household crosses thresholds that add hundreds or even thousands of dollars in annual costs. It also affects the optimal timing and size of partial Roth conversions and choices around pension lump sums or annuity elections.

What advisers and custodians are seeing in 2026

  • More deliberate sequencing of taxable and non‑taxable sources. Advisers report clients are drawing down taxable-brokerage and cash accounts first and preserving tax-deferred balances through age 73 to avoid spiking taxable income in pivotal years.
  • Smaller, earlier Roth-conversion slices. Rather than large conversions in a single low-income year, many households are converting modest amounts in 2026 to take advantage of an otherwise lower-tax window before RMDs kick in.
  • Closer coordination with Social Security claiming. Households modeling claiming at ages 62–70 are layering in the RMD delay to avoid combinations that would raise provisional income and increase the taxable portion of Social Security benefits.
  • Workaround reviews for pension elections. People weighing single‑life versus joint‑and‑survivor pension options are revisiting projected survivor income with the knowledge that an extra deferred year of IRA/401(k) growth may change the trade-offs.
  • Operational fixes remain necessary. Major custodians and broker-dealers have updated client notices and distribution workflows in 2026, but advisers continue to flag mismatches: automated RMD notices sent in error, withholding elections that don’t reflect new timing, and inherited-account complexities that require manual review.

Concrete examples that illustrate the stakes

Example 1 — Tax-bracket management. A married couple with a $1 million traditional IRA and moderate other income might face a 4% RMD equal to $40,000. If, without deferral, that $40,000 pushes their taxable income over a bracket threshold or into a higher IRMAA tier, the couple could see a material increase in Medicare premiums or Social Security taxation. Keeping an extra year’s growth in the IRA — or doing a small Roth conversion in a lower-income year — can avoid those consequences.

Example 2 — Roth-conversion staging. A single retiree with $300,000 in a traditional IRA and $30,000 in taxable interest in 2026 could convert $10,000 to a Roth in 2026 and pay tax at their current marginal rate. That reduces required taxable balances later and can lower the chance of higher taxable Social Security or IRMAA exposure when RMDs begin.

401(k) and in-plan Roth nuances

Plan provisions vary. Some employer 401(k) plans permit in-plan Roth conversions and in-service rollovers; others do not. The mechanics matter: in-plan Roth conversions can move future growth to tax-free status but may trigger withholding or plan-level constraints. Adviser action: confirm in-plan rules and exact deadlines with HR and the plan’s recordkeeper before executing rollovers or conversions.

Pensions, lump sums and survivor concerns

For defined-benefit participants offered a lump-sum buyout, the RMD deferral can shift the calculus. Taking a lump sum and rolling it to an IRA keeps the deferral option but reintroduces RMD rules later; choosing an annuity provides predictable lifetime income that can reduce reliance on taxable withdrawals. Run scenario-based projections that include survivor needs, projected longevity, and tax-bracket volatility.

Operational pitfalls still tripping up retirees

Advisers continue to report three common operational friction points in September 2026:

  1. Automatic RMD notices from custodians that don’t account for the person’s revised start year;
  2. Withholding elections set to a default percentage that produces under-withholding when a later RMD is taken; and
  3. Misunderstanding inherited-IRA rules — beneficiaries often face different distribution regimes that were not changed by the age rise.

Checklist: verify your custodian’s calculated RMD start year in writing; review withholding elections before taking any distributions; and get separate custodial confirmation if you are an inherited-account beneficiary.

Expert guidance and next steps

If you turned 73 in 2026 or will in the near term, prioritize three actions this fall:

  • Request a written RMD start-year calculation from each IRA and 401(k) custodian.
  • Model 2026–2028 taxable income scenarios that include partial Roth conversions, projected RMDs, and Social Security claiming outcomes.
  • Confirm pension election specifics and run survivor-income scenarios if you’re weighing lump-sum versus annuity choices.

What to watch next

  1. Custodian and recordkeeper updates through year-end 2026 — expect finalized client notices and updated online calculators from major firms.
  2. IRS and Social Security clarifications or examples that address edge cases such as partial-year conversions, multi-plan coordination and inherited-account interactions.
  3. Legislative proposals that could change tax brackets, IRMAA indexing or Social Security taxation mechanics — any such proposals would reshape the planning landscape for this cohort.

Frequently asked questions

Do I still have to take an RMD in 2026 if I turned 73 this year?

Generally no — if your RMD start age was pushed to 73 by SECURE 2.0 and you turned 73 in 2026, your first RMD timing will reflect the new rule. That said, confirm with each IRA and 401(k) custodian in writing because some automated notices have continued to list prior start years.

Should I do Roth conversions in 2026?

Possibly. Many advisers recommend smaller, staged conversions in a low-income year to reduce future RMD pressure. Whether it makes sense depends on your current marginal tax rate, anticipated future rates, and potential effects on Medicare premiums and Social Security taxation. Run scenario analyses or consult a tax professional before converting.

How does the RMD delay affect Social Security taxation and Medicare IRMAA?

The RMD delay can help avoid a temporary spike in provisional income that increases the taxable portion of Social Security or pushes you into a higher IRMAA bracket. Conversely, deferring RMDs can concentrate taxable income later. Model both short- and medium-term income paths to see the net effect.

What about inherited IRAs — do they benefit from the age change?

No. Inherited IRAs and the rules that govern beneficiaries are subject to separate statutory and regulatory rules that were not broadly altered by SECURE 2.0’s RMD-age change. Beneficiaries should obtain specialized guidance for their situation.

Bottom line: the RMD-age increase remains a time-sensitive planning lever for the class of 2026. The practical prize is not just delayed distributions; it’s the ability to sequence income, limit tax and Medicare exposures, and design Roth and pension moves with greater precision. Confirm custodial calculations, run multiple tax scenarios, and coordinate with your financial and tax advisers before acting.