Protection of IRA from creditors

I have a TIRA with about $3mm in cash and securities. As my screen-name would imply I live in Washington State. I have a fairly “high risk” occupation which could, at some point in the future, lead to a lawsuit being filed. One never knows what happens in court, but should there be a major judgement (>$1mm e.g.) against me, my only asset, aside from my home is my IRA. I currently have it at a broker and manage my investments daily. I have several questions, some of which are Washington State specific..
1.) Assuming the judgement does not relate to back taxes, or arrearages for child support or alimony, is the principal within my IRA protected?
2.) Are withdrawals from my IRA (I take RMDs each year and actually take more than my RMD as I need that to live on) protected? i.e. if I take a withdrawal from my IRA and deposit it in my checking account, can that be seized? How about if I write checks directly from my IRA to pay major expenses (mortgage, credit card bills etc.) as my broker now allows check writing (or can that be restricted by a court order?)
3.) If the answer to 1.) and 2.) are that I am relatively “safe” that is great. If I am NOT, then how would I become safer? I have a friend who took his TIRA and rolled it over into a 401-K that he started inside of his small business because he was advised that this would give him more protection.. but I have heard that the Federal protection only is up to $1mm, whereas I had THOUGHT that Washington State gave 100% protection?

Your IRA-centric perspective will add to whatever input I get from my estate planning attorney when I engage him/her shortly.

Thank you!!



  1. IRAs receive $1M CPI Adj. (2018 = $1,283,025) federal bankruptcy protection. Title I ERISA anti-alienation creditor protection does not apply to IRAs. Creditor protection therefore is subject to state law. WA does seem to provide 100% creditor protection of IRA principal except for QDROs and federal attachments.
  2. Protection of distributions is usually much more nuanced and subject to precedence of state case law. Attachments could be limited to a percentage or protection could be limited to amounts necessary for support. Nothing short of a consultation with a local lawyer can really answer this.
  3. ERISA Title I only applies to 401k plans with non-owner/spouse employees. If the small business had a 401k plan with other eligible employees The 401k would receive full anti-alienation protection. However one-participant 401k plans by definition can only cover owner(s) an optionally spous(s). They receive no ERISA Title I asset protection. A one-participant 401k does receive unlimited federal bankruptcy protection. WA does seem to provide 100% of one-participant 401k  principal except for QDROs and federal attachments.

Like I said above, simply reading state statutes or relying on ranom anonymous internet sources will not give you a definitive answer. If you have significant assets at risk,  a consultation with a local lawyer is your best option.

Thank You!!  I WILL contact a WA-state attorney to get their input, but from what you said it sounds as though I do not pick up any additional protection by rolling over my TIRA into my small-business 401-K??  Thx.

Add new comment

Log in or register to post comments