Appleby

Generally, you can use single or ‘head of household’, whichever applies, if you did not live with your spouse for the entire year

Generally, you cannot recharacterize a conversion if it is past the October 15 deadline. The article to which you refer may have been discussing writing off losses, which requires a distribution of all of your Roth IRA balances. See http://www.irs.gov/publications/p590/ch02.html#d0e11029

Since you did not remove the 2006 excess by the deadline, it became a 2007 Roth IRA contribution and you owe the IRS a penalty of 6% on the amount for 2006. Since you already exceeded your 2007 Roth IRA contribution, you need to remove it from your Roth so as to avoid another 6% penalty

I t does not appear that indirect rollovers apply. The title of the section is for Direct Rollovers. And every other document, including the technical explanation says direct rollovers. I would'nt place any value on the e-mail. I have seen too many from them that include inaccurate information.

I doubt the custodian can do anything at this point. The withholding amount has already been remitted to the IRS, and the 945 must show the amounts remitted as of year-end. I agree with the other posters that the short term loan is the solution. You mention that the individual may not receive the entire amount as a tax-refund. But, technically, he/she should ---either as an actual refund or a reduction in taxes owed. Either way, the net effect is that the amount withheld for taxes will reduce the amount owed to the IRS.

Another good reason to officially terminate the plan is …the direct rollover ( rollover to IRA) options for nonspouse beneficiaries is still an optional provision . However, where a defined contribution plan is terminated, the rollover option is available to the beneficiaries, regardless of whether the plan was amended to include that provision. The RMD for this year that Bird mentioned would be required if the Mom did not satisfy her RMD before she died. In which case, the beneficiaries would be responsible for satisfying that RMD and it would be reported in their names and TINs. I agree with Bird too on the observation. There is a general consensus that they are unable to determine if such a calculate would be accurate, based on the multiple factors that apply- namely the one mentioned. And since the rules that require them to calculate the RMD for IRAs excludes inherited IRAs, they do not include them in their RMD processes. The beneficiary is fully responsible for ensuring the calculation is accurate.

Thank you gentlemen, This is much appreciated. Denise

Thanks masteff. I sent an e-mail to their helpdesk at irs.gov.website.helpdesk@speedymail.com I hope that means a 'speedy' resolution

Thanks David. Would you happened to also have a link to the more comprehensive instructions, like the one at http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1099r.pdf ? Oddest thing is that I used it just a few days ago- but as you can see they changed the content of the link. I am hoping someone downloaded a copy. Denise

Does anyone have a copy of the 2007-1099-r Instructions? The IRS has already uploaded the 2008 version at the url http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1099r.pdf. And, where the instructions are listed http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/lists/0,,id=97817,00.html , it has 2006 and 2008, but not 2007. Same for the general instructions.

Also, the custodian is required to calculate the RMD amount if they had the account as of 12/31 of last year. They must either: -------Provide your parents with the calculation upfront, or -------Provider a reminder that the RMD is due , with an offer to perform the calculation upon request. Check for any notification they may have received from the custodian during the last few days/weeks, as they are required to provide the notification by January 31…or , your parents may ask them about the RMD notice that they should receive for their IRAs

This is my post to which Dave responded. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=33077. Seems like the same thing-almost? JanetM is right. It seems this applies when there has been ‘no new responses’ since you last posted to the thread. The asterisk is visible to you only if you posted to the thread.

I remember having the same question sometime ago. See if this helps. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=33083

She could ask for (or review online if available) a copy of their IRA agreement. This would include default beneficiary provision, and provide some direction on ‘who is the beneficiary’, when no beneficiary designation is on file. Many default to the spouse. But more importantly…An IRA cannot be established without an IRA adoption agreement. And all IRA agreements include a built-in beneficiary designation. The form or document should have included a provision that states ‘’’if you fail to designate a beneficiary, your beneficiary will be ____”. Since they are saying that the estate is the beneficiary due to the lack of beneficiary form, ask the executor to send them a written request to provide written confirmation that they did not receive a beneficiary designation for the IRA or state whether they lost the beneficiary designation form, and ‘who is the beneficiary’. The tax consequences and limited options that could apply if the beneficiary is the estate is too significant to let it go without being absolutely certain.

Bird, you are right that the first time homebuyer exception applies to an IRA and not a 401(k). I think the poster is looking for the extended repayment feature that applies to a loan from a 401(k), and as you know, a loan cannot be made from an IRA... and distributions must be rollover over ( re-deposited) within 60-days in most cases. So, my modified response … For IRAs, you can withdraw any amount at anytime. If the amount is rolled over within 60-days (assuming it is rollover eligible), the amount is tax-free and penalty-free. If the IRA distribution is used towards a first-time home, the 10% penalty does not apply. This is limited to $10,000 (this may be where the poster got the $10,000 from). For 401(k) plans ( and other non-IRA employer sponsored plans), the participant may borrow the lesser of $50,000 or 50% of his or her vested balance. However, a participant may be able to borrow up to $10,000, even if 50% of the vested balance is less than $10,000 [ this could also be where the poster got the $10,000 from, especially given the extended repayment period) . This loan may be repaid over five years. The repayment period may be longer if the loan is used for a principal residence. Of course, as Bird explained, the availibility of the loan depends on plan provisions.

No. That would create an excess contribution. An exception would apply if the amount had been removed as a return of excess, along with any net income attributable. But that is not the case here (based on the information presented). No. This exception (which is a loan), does not apply to IRAs. An exception applies to qualified reservists who are called to active duty, that would allow a re-contribution of withdrawals within certain period.

Technically, they are two separate issues…I think I know what you mean, but for the benefit of someone who may be new to this area... You can contribute the maximum to both. Contributing the maximum is not affected by the MAGI threshold. However, since you are an active participant, your ability to claim a deduction for the IRA contribution depends on your tax filing status and your MAGI. In sum, the thresholds affect your eligibility to deduct the contribution, not your eligibility to contribute to your IRA

Discussion continued here Termination of Simple IRA -- How does story end?

Pretty cool. I did not know you could do that. I did not even realize those options were to the left. Shows how observant I am. I usually go straight to the insert (hyper) link option at the top. But I like this for inserting posts

Hi Janet, Click on the +Quote for the post that you want to insert Then , click “Add reply’ on the post in which you want to make the insertion. The quote will be added automatically. Let me know if it works

test

This may be getting a little technical here but I hope it helps…. When your employer adopts a SIMPLE IRA, he/she ( he) has two options from which to chose-for purposes of SIMPLE Adoption agreement, which dictate the terms of the plan. These options are : 1) The 5304-SIMPLE: Under this document, employees can choose to establish their SIMPLE IRA with any financial institution that can set up SIMPLE IRAs, and 2) The 5305-SIMPLE: Under this document, employees are required to establish a SIMPLE IRA with the designated financial institution. These employees can still establish a SIMPLE IRA with their financial institution of choice ; however, employees who so choose to do will be maintaining two SIMPLE IRAs , as the second SIMPLE IRA is eligible to receive only transfers and rollover contributions. The first SIMPLE, established with the designated financial institution, is the only one that is eligible to receive contributions. The assets can be transferred from the designated financial institution, to the other SIMPLE IRA, but restrictions could apply. Sounds like your employer choose option 2).

The IRS has provided written confirmation that taxpayers who are requesting a waiver of the excess accumulation penalty, should not pay the penalty upfront. The following statement was included in a Special Edition issue of their Employee Plan news :

The IRS has provided written confirmation that taxpayers who are requesting a waiver of the excess accumulation penalty, should not pay the penalty upfront. The following statement was included in a Special Edition issue of their Employee Plan news :

Hi masteff, He may actually want to avoid the rollover method and do a transfer instead. The transfer has no time limit ( such s the 60-day limit that applies to rollovers), and it has no number of occurrence limit, such as the once per 12-month that applies to a rollover. I think John was referring to a transfer. Rollover defined here http://www.retirementdictionary.com/Rollov...ontribution.htm Transfer defined here http://www.retirementdictionary.com/Transfer.htm