What share of a retirement account belongs in one self-directed IRA property
This is a question worth sitting with rather than rushing past, because both sides of it carry real risk. Say retirement savings have sat in index funds for years and the appeal now is a self-directed IRA buying one rental with cash. Tax-free rent inside a Roth is genuinely attractive, and rental income is often better understood than other asset classes an account might hold. The sizing question is where it gets hard. Put most of the account into one house and retirement becomes a single roof in a single zip code, plus whatever cash sits in the account for taxes, insurance, and the custodian's fee. If a tenant stops paying and the furnace fails at the same time, the IRA has to cover it from its own cash. Writing a personal check to help is a prohibited transaction and can disqualify the account, which is a hard constraint worth internalizing before this route gets taken. Go too small instead and the math weakens differently. A property cheap enough to be a small slice of the account tends to be one that eats management time and holds value poorly, and it still carries the same annual custodian fee as a larger holding. There's a floor and a ceiling here, and reasonable operators land in different places depending on how much liquidity they're keeping outside the account. What share of a retirement account is generally defensible in one directly held property is worth asking anyone who has actually run this structure.
What share of a retirement account would you put into one directly held property?
16 votes