The ‘Mega IRA’ Cap Is Back: What High Earners Should Watch in 2026
Proposed legislation targeting “mega” retirement accounts has put high-net-worth IRAs and 401(k)s back in Washington’s crosshairs.
The bill would force wealthy account holders to take mandatory distributions and block new contributions — a response to data showing some investors have accumulated multi-million-dollar balances through early-stage private equity and startups.
But while similar proposals have stalled in the past, this bill may reflect a broader policy trend. The legislative effort coincides with recent U.S. Department of the Treasury measures targeting other “aggressive planning” strategies like Section 351 ETF exchanges.
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more – straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice – straight to your e-mail.
So whether this specific measure advances through Congress or not, the debate highlights key considerations for long-term tax, liquidity, and asset-location planning.
Here’s what high-earning IRA account holders need to know in 2026.
Newly proposed limit cap on IRAs and 401(k)s
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Richard E. Neal (D-Mass.) recently introduced legislation to cap IRA and 401(k) balances for high-net-worth accounts.
But the proposed restrictions don’t apply to everyone with a large account balance. Instead, to trigger mandatory withdrawals and contribution bans, a taxpayer must meet two criteria in the same tax year:
- High-income floor: Modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) over $400,000 for single filers (or $450,000 for married couples filing jointly).
- Total asset cap: Combined retirement balances exceeding $10 million across all traditional IRAs, Roth IRAs, and defined contribution plans (like 401(k)s and 403(b)s).
If passed, the legislation would bar any individuals meeting both rules from making further contributions to their tax-advantaged retirement savings accounts for that year.
Additionally, forced withdrawals of the aggregate excess would be required (more on that below).
The two-tiered forced withdrawal rule
For high earners with over $10 million in affected accounts, the proposal requires accelerated withdrawals from tax-advantaged accounts. Yet the withdrawal rules are slightly different depending on how much you have saved for retirement.
|
Account Balance |
Withdrawal Rule |
Tax Impact |
|---|---|---|
|
> $10 million |
Must withdraw 50% of the aggregate excess over $10 million each year. |
Taxed as ordinary income (up to 37%) if taken from traditional retirement savings accounts. The effective start date would be January 1, 2027. |
|
> $20 million |
The portion exceeding $20 million must be withdrawn (starting with Roth account funds first). |
Distributions from Roths remain tax-free upon withdrawal, but future tax-free compounding ends for those funds. The effective start date would be January 1, 2034. |
Traditional IRAs and 401(k)s are normally subject to required minimum distributions (RMDs) beginning at age 73 or 75, under the SECURE 2.0 Act. By requiring a 50% payout of the aggregate excess over $10 million, this proposal creates a much steeper payout schedule that applies regardless of age.
Additionally, while Roth accounts are funded with after-tax dollars and allow tax-free withdrawals without lifetime RMDs, the bill targets high-net-worth Roth IRAs by requiring excess funds to be transferred to standard taxable accounts (if an account is worth $20 million or more).
Once forced money leaves a Roth, it enters a regular brokerage or bank account. From that day forward, any dividends, interest, or capital gains generated by those funds are subject to annual federal and, where applicable, state income taxes.
Why it’s proposed (and why it faces resistance)
Wyden and Neal introduced their mega-IRA cap legislation in conjunction with Joint Committee of Taxation (JCT) data showing that over 32,000 Americans hold more than $10 million in tax-advantaged accounts.
Notably, the data presented a core group of about 200 individuals who hold an average of $409 million each — largely through early-stage private equity or startup investments placed inside self-directed IRAs, as reported by The Wall Street Journal.
“Tax-preferred retirement accounts are not supposed to be a loophole for the ultra-rich to shelter immense fortunes,” Wyden stated in a press release. “They’re a lifeline for working Americans who may not otherwise have a dignified retirement.”
However, this is not the first attempt at a cap. A similar provision was included in early drafts of the Biden-era Build Back Better Act before lawmakers removed it from the final bill.
The primary pushback came from the financial services industry, including groups like the Retirement Industry Trust Association (RITA) and alternative asset custodians.
Critics claimed that forcing rapid distributions on private equity, startup stock, or real estate assets would force account holders to sell non-public assets at fire-sale prices just to satisfy cash distribution mandates.
Congressional Republicans and conservative think tanks, like The Heritage Foundation, also opposed these measures. They claimed that forcing new distribution rules onto existing balances would unfairly penalize investors who followed the law as originally written.
What high-net-worth investors should watch in 2026
While the debate over this specific bill continues, the renewed discussion signals that mega-retirement accounts remain in the legislative limelight. High earners and savers can use these proposed rules as a “stress test” for their long-term estate and tax plans:
- Diversify across account types. Holding all your wealth in a single tax-deferred vehicle can create legislative risk, or, at the very least, increase your total lifetime tax burden. Spreading assets across traditional, Roth, and taxable brokerage accounts gives you flexibility to manage your adjusted gross income (AGI) if distribution rules or federal tax brackets shift.
- Build liquidity alongside private assets. Self-directed IRAs containing private equity, startup stock, or real estate face liquidity risks when required distributions apply. Maintaining liquid buffers, like public equities or cash equivalents, may help prevent forced sales of illiquid assets during regulatory changes or normal RMD years.
- Keep alternative asset valuations audit-ready. IRAs holding private stock or real estate may draw increased IRS scrutiny because misvalued assets can trigger accidental “self-dealing” or other prohibited transactions. Thus, keeping annual, independent appraisal records could help your portfolio stay compliant if valuation enforcement tightens.
For high earners, watching Washington is wise, but you don’t have to wait for a final vote on a key piece of legislation. A flexible tax plan built on true asset diversification remains one of the single best protections against an ever-shifting tax code.
