jpod

Registered
 View profile
  • Content count

    2,326
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 See their activity

jpod last won the day on March 17

jpod had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

146 Excellent

About jpod

  • Rank
    Registered User

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Interests
    golf, major league baseball, little league baseball
  1. I did not read the complaint or all of the FAQs. Obviously there is some theory which plaintiffs' counsel will advance for why this product is not a guaranteed benefit policy that does not hold plan assets, or how GW is otherwise a fiduciary with respect to the product. Do we know what that theory is?
  2. Yes, it's "permitted" in the sense that it is not per se illegal; but, yes, it certainly could pose PT issues.
  3. I guess it remains to be see whether a court would defer to the DOL's safe harbor in a private cause of action where the facts are very bad (as FGC posits). Probably, however, we will never see such a case because the plan sponsors who are large enough to be a target for the class action bar probably do undertake the type of due diligence FGC describes, and in fact probably get the IRA fees down to almost zero.
  4. This is quite likely a 406(b) pt whether or not the son is a p-i-i.
  5. I understood the question to relate to the timing on depositing employer contributions for deduction purposes, not the DOL rules for participant contributions and loan repayments.
  6. There are some exceptions, like for certain grandfathered plans, but otherwise the tax treatment of non-qualified deferred compensation for employees of tax-exempt entities is governed by Section 457.
  7. Before attempting to answer I would like to know what the participant is trying to accomplish here. Is he/she one of those folks who simply doesn't want the benefit at all (for religious or other reasons)? That's not really what the term "disclaimer" implies.
  8. No offense to anyone, but I don't understand the interest in this issue. How can you advise a client in any manner other than to suggest that at a minimum it would be very aggressive if not clearly wrong to take the position that retirement didn't occur until Jan. 1?
  9. Assuming the nonprofit is also tax-exempt, and putting aside potential UBTI calculation issues, isn't there a time limit under 415 for counting an annual addition for the current limitation year? Also, does the plan by any chance state a deadline?
  10. Is there a specific eligibility rule? I would think that because it must be a top hat plan it is likely to say that someone is eligible only if the Board or some other person informs him or her that he or she is eligible.
  11. Oh, you meant Sports Authority the sporting goods store? My bad; thought you were talking about a governmental sports authority.
  12. This was not a 457(b) plan of a governmental entity requiring funding per IRC Section 457(g)?
  13. The characterization of the remaining amounts as "trailers" is irrelevant. The money belongs to the beneficiary, either by designation or default per the plan document. Period; end of story. If the beneficiary is the estate, well that's unfortunate.
  14. Isn't there an explicit rule in 401(a)(2) that prohibits reversions until all plan liabilities have been satisfied? If you are worried about bumping up against a March 15 tax deduction deadline how would that be relevant if you are going to use the DB surplus via the replacement plan exception?
  15. There is no tax deduction claimed on the return. You report the Box 1 amount on the wages line on your 1040.