is the income subject to the 6% penalty for excess roth contributions?

Hello,

I have a practical, procedure question regarding a 401(k)/Non-Qual Deferred comp. Wrap plan.

In a Wrap scenario, an HCE can defer into the non-qual plan, and then can decide how much of the non-qual deferral the HCE can place into his/her 401(k) account. The problem is that by the time ADP testing is complete for a year end, the HCE's W-2 for the year of deferrals has usually been completed (by Jan. 31).

So, if the HCE decides to go ahead and execute the "pour-over" from the non-qual to the 401(k), how would this be reported on the W-2? Where on the W-2 would one list the amount that has gone from the non-qual into the 401(k)? I guess an amended W-2 is required?

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

This is addressed to companies that have (or had) retiree medical and the impact that FAS106 had on the coverage. What kind of changes did you make to your retiree coverage? Increase the retiree paid portion? Freeze the company-paid portion? If you eliminated retiree medical, how did you do it? A phased approach? All at once? Did you give employees any subsidy to make up for the loss of retiree medical (e.g., an additional contribution to a defined contribution plan or lump sum payment)? How was that subsidy calculated?

Employee contributed the maximum $10,500 to a 403(B). He terminates, and is hired by a company that has a 401(k) plan in the same calendar year. Do the 402(g) limits apply to both plans which would prevent him from contributing to the 401(k) plan?

I requested an electronic signature using the recently-released form two months ago. I sent the request certified, so I know it was received; however, I have heard nothing back. Has anyone received a response to their request for an EFAST electonic signature?

Someone told me that Blaze has/had an internal rate of return calculator built in to it. I don't seem to be able to find it anywhere. Can anyone tell me if it still exists and if so, where is it on the system?

Thanks for your help.

John

We have a plan participant who wants to take a hardship distribution due to medical expenses that were incurred this year. This is allowed under the terms of the plan. The problem, however, is that he has already paid for a portion of the medical bill. He would like to take a distribution that covers the entire amount. Can we pay him the entire amount or only the amount that he has not already paid for?

I have been unable to find anything that says one way or the other whether you can reimburse expenses that have already been paid.

Has anyone seen an analysis of the application of Gramm-Leach-Bliley ("GLB") to 403(B) plans. In brief, GLB requires protection of "consumer's" and "customer's" "nonpublic personal information." These are all defined terms found in GLB and in several different sets of regulations from various regulators.

I've seen a single short article that concludes, without analysis, that participants in qualified plans are not consumers under GLB. I've not seen any specific mention of 403(B) plans and would be interested in any articles or comments. Thanks.

Does anyone know the location (hopefully on-line) of a thorough discussion on the rules governing contribution limitations to VEBAs - particularly as they apply to pre-funding post-retirement medical and life insurance benefits? . My client is a privately=owned utility that is being required to pre-fund welfare benefits by their tae-making approval board. Also what are the filing requirements (if any) for a VEBA of this type?

Does anyone have experience/citations as to amortization of participant loans when there is a change in payroll frequency?

We have a large client who will be switching from weekly to bi-weekly payroll. The many existing loans were documented and repayments calculated based on weekly payroll. The client would like to just double the weekly deduction to determine the bi-weekly deduction, and to leave the amortization schedule alone. In the past, we have usually instructed our clients to reamortize the loan based on the new payment frequency; however this client is balking due to the large number of loans and the related recordkeeping costs for reamortization.

Several years ago, the IRS (or Joint Board, I forgot who) pronounced that an actuary must have verification that a contribution was actually made in order to sign a Schedule B reflecting that contribution. That essentially prohibited the then popular "to be made before September 15" on Schedule B's, and often leads to timing difficulties approaching the filing deadline.

First of all, who made the pronouncement, and what is the cite?

Second of all, which of the following would, by itself, be considered as acceptable verification?

1. Copy of cancelled check

2. Copy of investment or bank statement showing the posting of the contribution.

3. Signed statement by the plan sponsor stating that "a contribution of $X was made on ________.

4. Signed statement by the plan sponsor stating that "a contribution of $x will be made on _____.

5. Oral statement by the plan sponsor stating that "a contribution of $X was made on ______.

6. Oral statement by the plan sponsor stating that "

a contribution of $X will be made on ____.

7-10. Items 3-6 provided by the plan sponsor's accountant.

11-14. Items 3-6 provided by the plan sponsor's investment advisor/stock broker.

I feel comfortable with accepting #1, and not accepting any of the oral statements (by either the plan sponsor, the accountant, or the investment advisor/stock broker.

I'm also not comfortable with any of the signed statements by the accountant or investment advisor/stock broker.

What is everyone out there comfortable with?

Third of all, does anyone know whether the Joint Board or IRS disciplined any actuary for failure to comply with this pronouncement?

we've been advised by members of this board to generally keep life insurance outside of qualified plans. If a 61 year old University Professor feels the need for life insurance; how do you feel about borrowing from the plan money to put into a variable life policy? If the stock market does go to 30,000 he is probably ahead in the long run and if it sinks short term then he still has the death benefit. What are the odds of a long term stock market decrease?

I'm talking to a potential client with over 20 employees who also has several age 65+ employees. The employer has asked me why they can't pay these employees additional compensation to drop out of the employer sponsored health plan and buy medicare supplements. I've told them it was illegal but can't put my hands on anything that spells out the possible penalties. Does anyone know what the penalties are? The CFR reference?

I will be taking a new job soon and I have after tax contributions in my current 401K plan. What options are available for the after tax contributions? Is it best to leave it in the current 401K? Can I transfer it to my new employer's 401K? Can it be put in a rollover IRA?

I don't currently need the money so it I would like to avoid the tax implications of taking the distribution.

Interesting situation involving possiblity of taking a new job. In Colorado, teachers are covered by the PERA (public employees retirement association). However, Denver school district is not covered by PERA, but has a similar retirement plan.

Person Age 42 currently has 18 years service under PERA, the value of the account is approximatly $70,000.

Option 1. person stays with a PERA employer until 40 years of service pension benefit would be 100% of HAS (higest average salary, 3 years).

Option 2. person leaves PERA covered employment, would receive a pension of approx 45% of current HAS ($40,000) so 45% of $40,000, plus the proceeds from a Denver pension, assume 22 years, and perhaps an income of $80,000.

Option 3. same as option 2, except the person takes the $70,000 roll over to an IRA and manages the funds themselves.

It would seem that the proceeds of the the IRA could be considerably better than the 45% of $40,000, the real question is how much better or worse off would the person be than with OPTION 1.

My wife and I are modifying our estate planning family trust. Included in our assets is a qualified pension plan with myself as participant. As this is a second marriage for both of us, we wish to have my wife as primary beneficiary of the pension plan whereby she would receive all current income while she was still alive. The alternate beneficiary, after the death of my wife, would be the Family Trust A, which designates my daughter as beneficiary.

The intent here is that my wife, while she survives me, would have full use of the current income and, if necessary, principal . Up her death, the pension plan assets would go (via Trust A) to my daughter. In addition, I would like to keep the pension plan intact with periodic payments to her to retain the tax-deferred status of the assets and avoid the immediate income tax if a total payout were made.

In addition, since my daughter is currently 39 yo, if we could include her as a beneficiary, could we reduce the minimum required payout from the pension plan. I am 63 you and my wife is 58 yo.

Hello.

I've read that you can withdraw cash from a Roth IRA early (i.e., long before retirement) without a tax penalty, as long as:

a) It's for a qualified purpose, such as a college education or buying a house; and

b) As long as you withdraw only cash you've contributed, without taking out money that's accumulated via interest or capital gains.

However, I've also been told that if you withdraw money in this manner, you can only take it out in increments, versus one large lump sum. Ergo, if you wanted to take out $10,000 for a downpayment on a house, you'd have to withdraw, say, $1,000 a year for 10 years.

All that is a long way of saying I'm looking for information that can verify the truthfulness, or lack thereof, of the foregoing. If anybody knows of any articles on the RothIRA.com site, or elsewhere, I'd love to find out about them.

I wanted to get an idea of what you'd advise. My sister has $2000 to invest. She will also add $2000 a year. She thought she'd put it in a taxable account, but I suggested a Roth. This would be opened in her husband's name and he is 52 1/2 years old. They meet the income requirements.

Money would go toward purchase of a B & B in the future. She likes the idea that in a taxable account, it's immediately available, where in a Roth, she couldn't access earnings for 7 years. However, she probably wouldn't need the money for at least 7 years.

I told her that she could withdraw the CONTRIBUTIONS at any time without penalty. She just couldn't get the earnings without penalty until 7 years have passed. Since she probably won't need the money for at least that long, why not have the benefit of no taxes on the earnings. If she needed to withdraw the contributions, she could always do that at any time.

We're not talking a huge sum of money here, but I figure why pay ANY taxes that you don't have to. At least she's in Florida where they don't have state income tax to also pay.

It is my understanding that at age 59 1/2, her husband could withdraw ALL the earnings at once, if he wanted, and there would be no tax or penalty. Is this correct?

Also, he has a traditional IRA with a large sum of money. I think you can withdraw money from a traditional IRA at 59 1/2 and pay taxes but no penalties. Is this correct?

Thanks, Patti

Say you have an integrated plan that made a 5% of salary integrated contribution. The percent of comp will vary depending on the key/non-key mix and who is over/under the Social Security wage base.

To satisfy top heavy... what do you do exactly? Do you compute each participant's % on an individual basis and look to see who is under the 3% required min contribution? Or can you somehow just go along and fill in the gaps?

I'm not sure on this one... and I am trying to be mindful of 401(a)(4) here. I want to be able to meet those requirements too of course.

A plan has valued its assets and is supposed to make a lump-sum distribution to a 100% vested terminated participant within the next 60 days. However, one of the plan's assets ( a Receivable) happens to be the prior year contribution that is currently receivable from the employer. The terminated participant demands his full lump-sum distribution within the next 60 days (just like it says in the Summary Plan Description). However, the plan won't receive that prior year contribution from the employer corporation for another 5 months (the corporate employer's prior year income tax return has been extended & the corporation won't be paying that contribution to the plan until 5 more months).

What is the Plan supposed to do in order to comply with the 60 day deadline as stated in the Summary Plan Description? How can the Plan distribute an asset that it does not yet have in it's possesion. Is the Plan even required by ERISA to include the receivable in it's annual valuation ?[Edited by Moe Howard on 08-18-2000 at 07:52 PM]