RMD
ResMed Inc.
stock NYSE

Since he would have turned 73 this year you MUST begin taking an RMD this year. There is a table for the RMD on an inherited IRA that is different from the table your father would have used.

I believe you do not need to take RMD but have to empty the IRA in 10 years.
To avoid a large tax bill at the end of 10 years, take some withdrawal each year.
RMD (if required) is about 4% assuming you are not too old.
So take 5% out and call it a day and deal with it next year.

Yes you have to take the RMD. There are also rules for an inherited IRA especially if you are not a spouse. Very important as there are big penalties if you don’t follow them.

To expand, I assume his 72nd birthday was in 2025 and not January 2026 before he passed. If that's the case, he would have been obligated to take his first RMD this year -- the year he turns 73 -- and that's why you were told yes.

The surviving spouse can get absolutely hammered by taxes. My projected RMD is similar to yours, and there’s a 10 year age gap between me and my spouse. One of us is going to eat it without Roth conversions.

Qualified Charitable Distributions. Money has to be donated directly from 401k/IRA to a charity for it to work. 
Example is if you’re mad about your RMD being $50k but you only want to absorb $30k in income, you can donate $20k and that amount won’t count as taxable income for you, and the charity doesn’t pay any taxes either. You can donate the whole thing if you want to so you could have zero taxable income from RMDs if you want.

you give to charity from your 401k and it counts as RMD while not being taxed

As far as I can figure, in OP’s scenario they’d be paying about $6K annually in IRMAA surcharges. That’s an additional 2% “tax” on OP’s RMD. That’s going to have only a marginal impact on the Roth/401K decision.

This is my concern. With the national debt out of control, I feel like the only way out of it is to raise tax brackets across the board down the road. And using an RMD calculator based on what I have already accumulated (I’m almost 50), my tax bracket at RMD time will be the same or one step down from what I’m at right now.

But if he does conversion, won't he end up paying the highest possible rate on the conversion? Wouldn't he be better off taking income directly from the 401 at a potentially lower rate even with RMD

The primary reason one chooses Roth contributions is the prediction that your marginal tax rate will be lower at the time of the distribution. For most people who are retired at 75 (RMD time) they have to fill up all of the lower tax brackets before their RMDs start touching their pre-retirement tax levels.

if you have a huge tax bomb coming then you will have the flexibility to retire early and do roth conversions, pull down with SEPP, or simply start drawing at 59.5.
No harm in considering future implications and no doubt roth dollars give a lot of flexibility. I wouldn’t overlook 401k just because of the RMD.

You’re only 30 now - what if you have enough to retire in your 50s? Then you’d have 20 years to strategically distribute pre-tax assets before RMDs hit so you won’t have the “problem” of having $3M remaining in pre-tax when RMDs start. I’m not saying do zero Roth, but people are going way overboard w the RMD boogeyman. 
And think about it - when you’re 85 who cares if you’re in a high tax bracket? That means your investments have crushed it and you’re only taking RMDs which means you don’t need the $ to live on. At that point you can use QCDs to mitigate the RMD issue and you’ve won the financial game several times over. 

I guess the next question is what is the strategy on choosing the Roth allocation. With a Roth IRA it’s nearly at 75/25. I’m thinking of trying to aim for a 2.5 million 401k balance in traditional at 60. It seems like anything above that starts to have crazy RMD amounts

RMDs can be a considering factor, but ultimately it comes down to the tax bracket you put the money in vs when you withdraw. Putting in, you're contributing at your top tax bracket. Withdrawing, you're dealing with cascading tax brackets.
There's something to be said about having a mix of assets to choose from in retirement, but you're already filling up a decent amount of Roth space in your IRA contributions. Depending on when you retire and your annual withdrawal, you can always use a [Roth conversion](https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Roth_conversion) strategy at that time to the top of your tax bracket to lock in that savings for future years, reducing your future RMD obligations. Using 2026's 24% tax brackets for single filers, without considering the standard deduction, that covers income from $105K-201K; say you were withdrawing $150K/year, you have about $50K worth of tax space you can convert at a time when the future tax rates are clearer than they'll be 30 years from now.

I understand if I’m thinking about this I’m in a good position but if you can lock in 24% vs godknows what in 30 years on a 300k+ RMD + social security why wouldn’t you

I don't worry about RMD's. They have already raised the age that they start to 75. How many more times are they going to raise that age in the next 45 years? How old do you think you will be when you die? What will tax rates be then? I know all of this stuff is unknown but it all merges into meaninglessness for me.

RMDs are a boogyman more than a real "problem to solve" -- I think this as basically always been the case but *especially* in the last few years I think RMD calculation has become something like "4% starting at age 75", which is probably what you'd want to take out anyway.
Yes: if you see yourself approaching retirement with such a mountain of Traditional dollars that the RMDs could become an issue, you could just begin retirement early, using those dollars to fill up the bottom tax brackets and perform taxable Roth conversion. I don't think "I'm going to have too much money" is a problem that will sneak up on you.
If your Traditional account grows to the millions, it's probably because you were saving a bunch at a high marginal tax rate. The goal isn't to pay the least absolute dollars in tax, it's to end up with the most dollars after the taxes. With Roth accounts, I think many people think that "I'll have all these dollars available tax-free", but skip over "The Traditional account would have been larger enough that even after paying the tax, you could have more money in your pocket".
If you're charitably inclined, QCDs (donating from the traditional IRA) can satisfy the RMD, so that's a very tax-efficient way to donate.
I stand behind all the stuff I said above still. For most people, most of the time: mostly traditional *and* some Roth, is a good combination. If you're expecting a pension, rental or other income in retirement: perhaps some of the calculations change for you.
Ultimately though: if this line of thinking isn't resonating, or if a detailed analysis of your actual situation with real numbers doesn't agree: go ahead and favor Roth

Hi there, u/SeeBuyFly3. On behalf of my fellow mod, u/FidelityEmily, you are very welcome!
To answer your question, yes, when taking a distribution from a retirement account, you have the choice to withhold federal taxes anywhere from 1% to 99% online. If you are looking to withhold 100%, you can call our service line, and a representative will process it for you. We have associates available 24/7 for your convenience. You can say "RMD" when prompted by the automated system to be connected to the right group.
[Contact Us](https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/contact-us)
Thank you for choosing Fidelity. I hope you have a great day!