<prompt> Human: True or false: Once your 401k has reached the balance where a 4 drawdown income would incur a greater effective tax rate than the product of long-term capital gains ratecurrent marginal rate, it is no longer prudent to contribute?Example: Suppose Susans 401k had reached a balance of 3.9M at age 50. She is single and lives in a state without extra taxes. At 7 after-inflation return, she can reasonably expect a balance of 10.7M at age 65.At a 4 draw-down rate, this would yield an income of 428kyear, putting her withdrawals in the 39.6 marginal tax bracket. Suppose further that she is currently in the 28 marginal tax bracket, and has 1,000 pre-tax dollars to invest.If she chooses to put that money into her 401k, then it will grow to 2,760 by age 65 and shell have to pay a 39.6 tax on it, meaning her after-tax value at age 65 will be 1,667. But if she pays taxes now, she invests 720 after-tax dollars now and has 1,986 at age 65, which after taxes is 1,732 assuming a 20 long term capital gains tax on the difference of 1986-720. So Susan would be better off NOT putting this money in her 401k.Is all of this sound? Is there an effective maximum balance for a 401k?  <response>: Thats just a long-winded way of saying to make Traditional contributions if your marginal tax rate now is larger than you expect it to be in retirement, Roth otherwise. 