AndyH

See if the agent has a yacht.

You will be wasting Willie's lunch time.

I don't see why 3 would apply, and my thinking is either 1 or 2, not both if they are deferrals, but I'm far from fluent in 457 plans so I'm not certain of that.

I took C-1 and C-2 DB at the same time.

SWH&WT Thanks for the moral support, Katherine et al. Now, about those people who post pictures of MAMMALS, REPTILES, FELINES, AQUATIC CREATURES, CARTOONS, MOVIES, ANIMATIONS, BABIES, SISSIES, ACRONYMS, ETC. Stop misdirecting my line of vision which would obviously be more productive studying your thesis-like contributions and legal advice!

Agree. I took two at once but I had been in the business 12 years and I was highly motivated. If you are a newbee, forgettaboutit.

evphd, I think the real answer to your question is "None of the above". It appears to me that to maximize your deferral opportunity you should max out your 403(b) salary deferral and establish a 401(a) profit sharing plan (instead of a SE 401(k) plan-but your existing plan may allow both) through your self employed business. Or you could even consider a defined benefit plan depending upon your situation. In this manner you may actually have several different limits: Salary deferral opportunity maximized through 403(b) $14K plus. 401(a) limit through University plan - as MGB said - assuming this is correct. 401(a) limit of 25/20% (or more if DB established) through side business-separate 401(a) limit Hope you've got enough money to do all this! How about those non-profits!

Agreed but I also Georgie did a pretty good job answering the question as well.

SWHT Page or Plant?

SWHT Guess Janet's been out at Zepplin concerts instead of the Boards. See Lori, guess Harwood had a point. We all need to Stop Wasting Harwood's Time. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?s...ic=28029&st=30#

Understood, but the counterpoint is that we don't think that the DOL would have any basis for being upset. It is perfectly within the rules.

SWHT Thanks for the SWHT! Saved me lots of time figuring out what you meant.

I see no reason why they can't have two identical plans, but based upon the eligibility criteria described the plans may need to be aggregated for testing purposes. Yes, it might avoid an audit but not much else, plus the cost of two plans might outweigh the savings from avoiding the audit.

Turtle, many are still using the "account balance method" through 2005, reasonable or not. Next year is a different story.

Thanks, Blinky, BTW, FYIFV.

I'm a very slow reader and cautious about wasting time. Anybody willing to answer Roman's question (I'm interested in the question in the second paragraph) in the Cliff Notes version?

......unless it is the spouse. (p.s. oops, I missed the non-spouse part.)

SWHT is a filter that should be added to each post that does not focus on a pension topic so one can search and exclude certain posts. Stop Wasting Harwood's Time http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?a...ndpost&p=112073 Excellent Link, Effen. Perhaps they will add SWHT to the list? FYIFV is a riot.

Just curious what this is, why it is constantly on the Boards (the Google site say it roams and you might see it once in a while) and why it might be viewing a user's profile right now.

SWHT That being said, yeah you are right about those records. But George still wouldn't let anything change, would he? But, then again, those in Red Sox nation know that small market teams often win the WS.

I'm a little slow this week I guess. What you are saying then is that a plan that has each person is his/her own group risks becoming disciminatory in operation. That is a fascinating angle. Thanks for that excellent addition to the discussion.

Ah, a Yankee fan. Gotta love em. p.s. You do realize that you are wasting Harwood's time, don't you?

Interesting comments, thank you. I don't often see the types of situations that you are describing, and certainly wouldn't advocate grouping people by age but I suppose that doesn't mean it isn't done. But if you had classes differentiated by age then certainly that could give rise to what you have described. Maybe that is the key to avoiding what you describe; making the allocation classes cross sectional by age.

Ned, stop wasting Harwood's time!

Guess I don't have to hibernate after all. Nice rough waters with appealing denizens.