Name a portfolio risk that rarely shows up on a client’s quarterly review and never on a performance statement, but which can quietly erase a six-figure retirement account between annual meetings.
Processing Content
The answer: the self-directed IRA your client opened without telling you.
First, a quick definition: A self-directed IRA follows the same contribution limits and tax treatment as the traditional or Roth IRA your client already holds. But a standard IRA at a brokerage keeps your client in publicly traded stocks, bonds and funds. A self-directed IRA sits with a specialized custodian and can hold real estate (including rental and commercial property), private placements, promissory notes, limited partnerships and even crypto. Finally, the account owner — not an advisor or a fund manager— makes every call.
It’s that sense of control that tends to attract hands-on, entrepreneurial clients to the accounts. Some of the dollars now in self-directed IRAs were rolled directly out of accounts you used to manage. A client takes a partial rollover to buy a rental “with my IRA” — or a brother-in-law floats a private deal at a barbecue, or a podcast sells the dream of tax-free real estate — and a slice of the household balance sheet walks out the door into an account you’ll never see on your aggregation feed.
The self-directed IRA market has grown well past a niche with custodians who hold such alternatives within retirement accounts administering hundreds of billions in assets. The catch is in the fine print: The IRS lets a self-directed IRA hold these alternatives only as arm’s-length investments with no personal benefit accruing to the owner — and the line between a deal that’s allowed and one that’s prohibited is far less obvious than most clients ever realize.
READ MORE: Investing in alts through a self-directed IRA? Read this first
Tax code, ‘disqualified persons’ and full-account distributions
Here’s why this should bother financial advisors more than it generally does: When one of these accounts goes wrong, it’s not by 10% or 20%. It goes to zero — worse than zero, because the tax bill survives the lost asset.
The mechanism is unforgiving: Under IRC §4975, money from a self-directed IRA cannot transact, directly or indirectly, with a “disqualified person,” meaning the owner, their spouse, lineal ascendants and descendants and entities those parties control. Cross that line, and §408(e)(2) deems the entire IRA distributed as of Jan. 1 of the year the violation occurred — not just the offending asset but the whole account.
The client owes ordinary income tax on the full value of the asset plus a 10% early-distribution penalty if they are under age 59 1⁄2. Just like that, the self-directed IRA’s tax shelter is gone retroactively.
Furthermore, the line sits far closer than clients realize. It is not enough for a transaction to be at fair market value, because fair pricing is irrelevant under §4975. A client who has their son, a licensed contractor, renovate the IRA-owned property “at cost” will likely trigger §408(e)(2). A client who personally guarantees a loan to an LLC their IRA owns (the IRA holds the LLC’s membership units, a structure often called a checkbook IRA) would trigger the clause, too.
That was essentially the fact pattern in Peek v. Commissioner, where the U.S. Tax Court treated personal guarantees as an indirect extension of credit and disqualified the accounts years after the fact, with the gains taxed on eventual sale.
A client who stays the weekend in their IRA-owned vacation condo crosses the line. So does a client who pays themselves a management fee. These are not exotic mistakes but intuitive moves a smart, well-meaning client can make. Critically, the self-directed custodian will not stop them, as they are explicitly non-fiduciary administrators. They record the transaction the client directs and disclaim any duty to evaluate it.
READ MORE: How securing held-away assets helps firms — and clients
Held-away accounts damage client trust
But ignorance will offer no protection when household wealth craters and your client asks how this happened on your watch. The technically correct answer, “That account wasn’t part of our engagement,” will satisfy no one — not the client, not their attorney and possibly not your compliance department.
The reputational and relationship exposure attaches to the trusted advisor, regardless of what the line items in the engagement agreement say.
READ MORE: Regulators warn of the perils of self-directed IRAs
3 ways to gain a wider view of client holdings
The fix isn’t to custody alternatives yourself or chase the assets onto your platform, it’s to obtain a wider view of the client’s holdings, whether you administer them or not.
These three simple steps will help.
Deal with the held-away question head-on. Ask, “Do you hold any retirement accounts at a self-directed or alternative asset custodian?” in each intake interview and in every annual review. It should be phrased so a client who’s proud of the rental property funded with self-directed IRA dollars doesn’t feel the need to hide it.Document the boundary. When a client discloses a self-directed IRA, note in writing that the account sits outside your management. Flag the prohibited-transaction rules and recommend they engage an ERISA attorney or a specialized CPA before transacting — and include this in the note as well. That single paragraph converts an invisible liability into a documented, supervised conversation.Know one referral. You don’t need to be the §4975 expert to help clients, but you do need to recognize the danger and have the name of a trusted referral to give the client before, not after, the IRS letter arrives.
READ MORE: 7 tax-planning provisions in SECURE 2.0 now that filing season is over
Secure Act 2.0 backstopOne nuance worth carrying into those conversations: Secure Act 2.0, Section 322 narrowed the blast radius so that only the IRA that engaged in the prohibited transaction is disqualified, not every retirement account the person owns. That’s a genuine improvement, but it protects the other accounts, not the one that broke the rule. The account in the deal still goes to zero.
The advisors who treat held-away, self-directed accounts as someone else’s problem are carrying an uncompensated risk they’ve never priced. The ones who simply ask, and write down the answer, have removed the blind spot for the cost of one question on an intake form.
