To BenefitsLink Home Page
To EmployeeBenefitsJobs Home Page
Get the BenefitsLink app for iPhone and iPad LinkedIn
Twitter
Facebook
Search the News


Featured Jobs
Legal & Compliance Specialist
Retirement Plan Administrators
Conversion Manager
Conversion Consultant
Documents Coordinator
Plan Consultant
Plan Administrator II
Conversion Specialist
Retirement Leaders
Actuarial Consultant
Relationship Manager
ERISA Attorney
Account Manager
Salesperson
Employee Benefits Sales Consultant
Associate Vice President & Regional Sales Consultant
Search all jobs
 

 
 
 

Jump to content


Photo

Are sponsors amending 457(f) plans or waiting for regulations?


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 strayhorn

strayhorn

    Registered User

  • Registered
  • 13 posts

Posted 10 November 2008 - 09:26 AM

Are plan sponsors amending their 457(f) plans now or waiting for issuance of regulations? Eliminating deferrals? Eliminating noncompetes? Adding materially greater benefits?

Edited by djoffe, 10 November 2008 - 09:36 AM.


#2 QDROphile

QDROphile

    Registered User

  • Sitewide Moderator
  • 3,483 posts

Posted 10 November 2008 - 11:15 AM

I imagine that if a sponsor (or the sposor' advisers) were on the edge or ove the line on the law before enactment of section 409A they will do the same under the 409A regime. But flauting the law now is even worse than flauting it then.

#3 J Simmons

J Simmons

    Registered User

  • Sitewide Moderator
  • 2,417 posts

Posted 10 November 2008 - 11:22 AM

457f Scoflaws beware! 409A is a bigger hammer.
John Simmons
jsimmons@ida.net


Note to Readers: For you, I'm a stranger posting on a bulletin board. Posts here should not be given the same weight as personalized advice from a professional who knows or can learn all the facts of your situation.

#4 Tauriffic

Tauriffic

    Registered User

  • Registered
  • 16 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 03:38 PM

See IRS Notice 2007-62. IRS will issue 457(f) regs but they will be substantially similar to 409A regs. One major difference to look for is the definitions of a "substantial risk of forfeiture." There was some discussion in the notice that the definition for SRF in the 409A regs may not be applicable to eligible 457 entities and that the 457(f) regs should therefore not include the same definition.

#5 strayhorn

strayhorn

    Registered User

  • Registered
  • 13 posts

Posted 08 February 2009 - 12:43 PM

See IRS Notice 2007-62. IRS will issue 457(f) regs but they will be substantially similar to 409A regs. One major difference to look for is the definitions of a "substantial risk of forfeiture." There was some discussion in the notice that the definition for SRF in the 409A regs may not be applicable to eligible 457 entities and that the 457(f) regs should therefore not include the same definition.