<prompt> Human: TL;DR: Isnt the value of getting additional money into a tax-sheltered account vastly higher than an extra few years of interest payments on student loans?Usually when the topic of retirement contributions vs. student loan pay down comes up, people say that you should pay down student loans when their interest rate approaches the expected rate of return of the stock market. But isnt that ignoring the massive value of getting more money into tax-advantaged accounts at a young age?I am asking from the position of a young professional who will likely be able to max out all available tax-advantaged investment opportunities in the first year or two of full-time work. The specific situation is whether one should contribute 5.5k to a Roth IRA in the last year of law school with a 100k job lined up, but the question applies more broadly. Shouldnt one pay down student loans early only once all tax-sheltered investment opportunities are gone?So to be concrete: would you pay 100 to get an extra 1000 into a Roth IRA in your 20s if you were out of other tax-advantaged investment options? For me, thats a no-brainer since Roth IRA savings are worth much more than taxable savings over a 40-year horizon. If you would pay that 100, then you should contribute to a Roth IRA before paying down even a 10 student loan. Thats far from conventional wisdom here.You even have the principle of a Roth IRA to take out in a pinch.What am I missing? Assistant: The specific situation is whether one should contribute 5.5k to a Roth IRA in the last year of law school with a 100k job lined upEh, doesnt really matter because its such a small amount.but the question applies more broadly. Shouldnt one pay down student loans early only once all tax-sheltered investment opportunities are gone?For a high income earner, the answer is probably yes. You can refinance your loan to low interest rates and then max out your tax-advantaged space. This isnt conventional wisdom here, because youre not earning a conventional income. Lawyers and doctors are going to do things a little bit differently than most people, because they have unique circumstances with high student loans and high income. You should go read biglawinvestor. I think youll appreciate his thoughts on these things.Human: Your biglawinvestor link is excellent. Its basically the exact thing Im thinking here.Eh, doesnt really matter because its such a small amount.For someone in this income bracket, its likely that they will still have Roth IRA funds when they die, perhaps 55 years from now at age 80. Assuming a 4 real interest rate, 5.5k is worth 47k 2017 dollars in 55 years. That a material amount of money to me. Assistant: Assuming a 4 real interest rate, 5.5k is worth 47k 2017 dollars in 55 yearsThats not even half the calculation. Figure out what the interest saved over the course of your student loans is by contributing the 5.5K to that instead. Then, figure out how much those savings will earn over the same 55 year period in a taxable account. Then, compare that amount to your 47k number. Even 47k will be an immaterial amount of money saved for you at age 80. If you save 2,000,000 for retirement so you can have a 4 SWR of 80k per year, a 1.8 drop in the SP500 like we had on 51717 would mean a one-day loss of 36,000 in your accounts. Of course, every bit helps. But I think focusing on whether to make a one-time contribution to a roth IRA v. student loans right now is probably not worth your time. Human: Yeah, great idea. So lets say it takes an additional six years to pay off that 5.5k with my strategy, so it ends up costing you 7800 to pay that 5.5k. Lets say, for simplicity, that the 7800 is all invested in a taxable account six years from now because Id be out of tax-advantaged space, so it only compounds for 49 years and at only a 3 real return because of taxes. That leaves 33k 2017 dollars compared to 47k 2017 dollars with the early Roth strategy. So the early Roth is worth 40 more. Its actually even better to do early Roth if one is able to deduct the student loan interest. Assistant: I dont disagree with you that the early roth comes out ahead, but I think your perspective is off. The 13k difference is just .065 of your retirement goal assuming 2M goal. Again, Im not saying every bit doesnt help, its just kind of negligible in the grand scheme of things and whether you do it or not isnt worth a ton of consideration. Human: That is an interesting way to put it, thanks. Another way to think about it is you hit your 2m target are few months earlier if youre saving around 5k a month in your 50s. That seems material to me!  <response>: The other thing we forgot to talk about was interest on 2M.Once youre that high, the 5k per month your putting in is relatively small. Your 2M would generate 20k each month. So that 13k is about 2 weeks between your 20k gains and 5k addition.It really is negligible. 