Jump to content

Bri

Senior Contributor
  • Posts

    1,080
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    57

Posts posted by Bri

  1. 1 hour ago, acm_acm said:

    Be careful.  As another poster said, it's the 5th anniversary of participation, not 5 years of participation, which often requires 1,000 hours in a plan year.

     

    I've seen this messed up several times by people just saying (and thinking) "5 years of participation".  The actual words matter.  It's best to not even say it that way.

    Well heck, if we're getting semantic/pedantic, let's go further and say it's the 5th anniversary of the first day of the plan year in which participation commenced.  :)

  2. And of course, I overlooked that it's still the 2024 minimum being paid based off 2023, so I do think they're going to have to recoup some of that IRA rollover to satisfy the RMD.  (And adjust the amount coming out of the IRA for earnings since it was an ineligible rollover contribution.  Hmmm, thinking out loud has me presuming only the "principal" amount coming from the IRA satisfies the RMD for the plan, like you couldn't count some of the earnings towards the RMD.)

  3. 35 minutes ago, 5500Nerd said:

    I thank you greatly. Some day the DOL will write the instructions with specifics. 

    if they hire enough monkeys and buy enough typewriters, sure.....

  4. As long as

    (a) document defines the compensation that way by source, and

    (b) the compensation definition isn't discriminatory (414(s) testing)

    Then this should be fine.  Maybe a suggestion to make sure the SPD spells that out well enough so people aren't leaving match money on the table for only doing 6% of the base pay, but otherwise folks just need to think it through and maybe sign up for more than 6% so that they still clear 6% of their entire "match compensation" figure.

×
×
  • Create New...