<prompt> Human: This is regarding the Roth vs traditional decision. If Im planning to be fully retired no work-related income by the time I withdraw from my 401k and IRA, does it ever make sense to choose Roth over traditional? Surely for most people their income at retirement cant be higher than their working age income no? I feel like Im missing something obvious, if anyone could break it down for me Id very much appreciate it.Edit: I think a source of confusion for me is what is included in taxable income at retirement? I can think of:-401k and IRA withdrawals-Income generated from taxable account long-term capital gains tax rate if in stocks held over a year?-Social security: no idea what Ill be getting from herePlease include other potential sources. So is the question then if the sum of the above will be greater than your working income before retirement?Clarification: Im talking strictly about full retirement, as in you dont work at all. Even if you are not making a lot now, and expect income to rise drastically in the future, shouldnt your marginal tax rate still plummet once you retire? The expected rise in income only matters in that it increases your savings and consequently the amount you withdraw when you are retired right?  <response>: Surely for most people their income at retirement cant be higher than their working age income no?A low earner in the 10-15 tax bracket might certainly be in a higher one in retirement. Low earners are generally better off contributing to Roth accounts while the money that goes in is taxed at a low rate. 