Leaderboard

Seems to be the smart move would be to announce 9/22 "based on our current interpretation" and state that "the IRS might provide further clarification at a later date."

Thank you very much Jakyasar, C.B. Zeller, and RatherBeGolfing. I hope you all , and everyone as well, stays safe.

I agree. Anyone who wants to ignore such posts is free to do so.

@Dave Baker Including a notification to Dave for this thread. I don't think it is necessarily inappropriate for a participant to come here to ask questions. Many have simple questions and just don't know who to ask or where to turn for information. I agree that it is inappropriate to try to resolve specific participant issues or lay blame on someone through the message boards. We never have all the information, and we only get one side of the problem. To that end, maybe just have Mods lock a specific thread when it gets combative and insulting, rather than not allowing questions from non-industry folks all together?

Hmmm. I need to get some popcorn for this thread!

You might want to tone down your rhetoric. This is a professional forum by professionals primarily for professionals. They are gracious enough to occasionally try and help the members of the public deal with issues. You are new member who has registered and only posted in this one thread. Usually when someone visits someone else's house they conduct themselves with manners and respect. Maybe the employer is at fault, but it has been like pulling teeth to get straight answers. Yet you have failed to demonstrate that you understand just how much responsibility you and your wife share in for this disaster. It is mind boggling how your wife can not know for five years that her deferrals have no been deducted from her paycheck. It is mind boggling that you can not know what your joint investment portfolios are doing over five years. You never checked to see that contributions were deposited and what the earnings were over time. Your conduct in this thread is not likely to inspire professionals to take time out of their busy days to receive abuse in return for their attempts to help.

I will keep beating this horse until it gives. Look at Notice 2005-92. It's not CARES Act guidance, but interprets the exact same statutory language in Section 103 of KETRA. Footnote 3, on page 14, reads: The Department of Labor has advised the Department of the Treasury and the Service that it will not treat any person as having violated the provisions of Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), including the adequate security and reasonably equivalent basis requirements in ERISA section 408(b)(1) and 29 CFR 2550.408b-1, solely because the person made a plan loan to a qualified individual in compliance with KETRA section 103, Code § 72(p), and the provisions of this notice. I can't imagine the DOL now reversing course and asserting an ERISA violation based on a lack of adequate security, especially where doing so would render the statute's explicit loan increase illegal for anyone with a vested balance below $100,000.

Website 1 is referring to the normal suspension of loan payments during an unpaid leave of absence of up to 1 year. This existed prior to the CARES Act. Website 2 is referring to the provisions of CARES Act sec. 2202(b) which allow a Qualifying Individual (as defined in the CARES Act) to suspend loan payments with a due date occurring in 2020 for 1 year. This can be used to extend the overall length of the loan beyond the 5 year max thanks to a specific provision in the CARES Act.