Leaderboard

PIT Bulletin 2005-04 states as follows: Because the focus is on whether the amount is deducted from the employee's compensation, not on the type of plan to which it is contributed, an employer match should not be subject to Pennsylvania state tax. That being said, at the federal level, the employer match to a 457(b) plan is subject to the $18,000 limit on total contributions. This contrasts with a 401(k) or 403(b) plan, in which only employee deferrals are subject to the $18,000 limit. Thus, if we're talking about a governmental 457(b) plan, it may make sense to have the employee deferrals made to the 457(b) plan, but the employer match made to a 401(a) plan. Of course, this doesn't work for a 457(b) plan of a nongovernmental employer.

It is a good thing. Now if they would just get off their high horse about applying forfs to SH contributions we would have something.

And if the plan restricts rollover amounts, the plan should provide very clear disclosure before the rollover.

When the safe harbor reg was issued in 1979 90% of 403b assets were held by TIAA/CREF which had only 2 products - TIAA traditional annuities and the CREF variable annuity. DOL reg did not require that a safe harbor plan add another vendor such as VALIC or Fidelity in order to have a reasonable choice. I don't see anything in the DOL reg that requires a safe harbor plan to have multiple vendors. No brainer. DOL Q/A-16 is vague as to whether a plan must have multiple vendors because the regulation does not require it and FAB cannot contradict the safe harbor reg.