Harwood

I saved the Conference Report based upon a link this site provided back in 2001. Attached is the section in question [i hope it is attached] Conf_645.pdf

Sec 72 is titled "Annuities; certain proceeds of endowment and life insurance contracts" However, the many subsections of 72 deal with a lot more than life insurance. Such as 72(p) "Loans treated as distributions" and 72(t) "10-percent additional tax on early distributions from qualified retirement plans."

Code 1, if under 59 /12 and if 2 does not apply Code 2 in very limited circumstances, such as for medical expenses under IRS 72(t)(2)(B) or if terminated at age 55 - 59 from the employer who sponsors this plan Code 7 if age 59 1/2 or more

The exception exists in "facts and circumstances", not "safe harbor" hardship regulations. I find it fascinating that Corbel documents use "safe harbor" for hardships, yet they slipped the "facts and circumstances" exception into their IRS-approved GUST document.

Generally, a plan loan does not increase the specific need that is stated in the hardship. I think the fact that a loan deduction will decrease your cash flow does not allow you to skip the loan and move immediately to hardship. The one exception is when a plan loan deduction might make one less credit-worthy to an outside mortgage lender. For purchase of a principal residence, you may be able to forgo the loan and go directly to a hardship distribution, because the loan deduction would increase the need stated in your hardship request. Of course safe-harbor contributions are not eligible for hardship distributions.

Form5500help.com has a 1995 DOL publication on Fidelity Bonds. Check out DOL page 20 "Amount of Bond" and the example on page 21 [adobe acrobat page 11] http://www.form5500help.com/fidelity_bonds.pdf

This may be taken out of context but here is one of several references to deductibles in DOL Reg 2580: §2580.412-11 Statutory provision. With respect to persons required to be bonded, section 13 shall be deemed to require the bond to insure from the first dollar of loss up to the requisite bond amount and not to permit the use of deductible or similar features whereby a portion of the risk within such requisite bond amount is assumed by the insured.

The answer is probalby buried in DOL Reg 2580.412 Here is a small piece: 2580.412-16 Amount of bond required in given types of bonds or where more than one plan is insured in the same bond. (b) When individual or schedule bonds are written, the bond amount for each person must represent not less than 10 percent of the funds "handled" by the named individual or by the person in the position. When a blanket bond is written, the amount of the bond shall be at least 10 percent of the highest amount handled by any administrator, officer or employee to be covered under the bond. It should also be noted that if an individual or group or class covered under a blanket bond "handle" a large amount of funds or other property, while the remaining bondable persons "handle" only a smaller amount, it is permissible to obtain a blanket bond in an amount sufficient to meet the 10 percent requirements for all except the individual, group or class "handling" the larger amounts, with respect to whom excess indemnity shall be secured in an amount sufficient to meet the 10 percent requirement.

403(b) Answer Book [1998], 12:19 "A participant can designate a charity as a beneficiary."

Quoting SelectBENEFIT Financial Focus, Fall 2000: "Consider a Charity A qualified charity will not pay any income taxes when it receives your retirement plan assets. In addition, your estate may be eligible to receive an estate tax deduction on account of your charitable deduction."

I'm sure you can, but I have nothing to back it up.

Deferrals are always based on payday, not "pay-period ending" or "time-report ending." [Counting hours is a different discussion]. I am unclear how "a deferral you made at the end of 2003 will actually be reported on the 2004 W-2"

Do a word search of the document for all occurrences of "401(a)(9)"

There is monthly Principia diskette from Morningstar which has return information for a number of different periods. Phone: 800-735-0700 or try MorningstarAdvisor.com Some free websites; data definitely is not always accurate http://quicktake.morningstar.com/Fund/Snap...PTRIX&hsection= http://www.estrong.com/strongweb/strong/js...fo/qr/index.jsp http://bloomberg.com/ The trouble with all sources is that they are inflexible regarding their time periods. All are based upon a month end date and do not have all possible monthly time periods. Bloomberg.com used to have Total Return Calculator where you could put in the dates. It is gone now - they want you to buy Bloomberg Professional, which is more than $1,000 per month. I have yet to find another website where you can put in the beginning and ending dates for return calculations.

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?s...indpost&p=84407

How about looking at participants in the plan who had no contributions or withdrawals during the period in question, and see what their actual rate-of-return was for those funds?

Maybe it'll be part of resurrected legislation to require spousal consent for distributions from all plans, not just annuity plans.

$1,000 Gross $100 401(k) deduction $900 Taxable for FWT $1,000 taxable for Social Security $1,000 taxable for Medicare $1,000 FUI Per "The Payroll Source 2000:" $900 Michigan SWT $1,000 Michigan SUI Local jurisdictions can go either way on 401(k) taxability Get current Michigan information at: http://www.michigan.gov/treasury

§2520.104-41 and §2520.103-1(d)

Some links are at: http://www.watsonwyatt.com/us/news/erisacalendar.asp

http://www.fool.com/taxes/2002/taxes020222.htm

I have heard of bankruptcy lawyers taking this position. They are wrong - the Internal Revenue Code must be followed on reporting defaulted loans. A Bankruptcy court can stop the payroll deductions for loan payments but they can't stop the tax consequences. The Participant now has a new creditor - the IRS.

Could Tom Poje's "Inflation Adjusted Limits" file be altered to give you pre-EGTRRA numbers? http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?s...t=0entry76748

IRS speakers state that it is not acceptable to distribute the ineligible deferrals directly to the participant and report such on a 1099-R. There is nothing in the Code or Regulations or published procedures to support this type of distribution. To do so might place the tax qualification of the plan at risk. An early version of the CORBEL GUST document had a provision for distributing ineligible deferrals back to the employee from the Trust. That paragraph was removed from the final document - I assume because the IRS wouldn't allow it. Some material is at www.mhco.com/Chronological_Updates/Distribution,%20Reporting-Ineligible%20Employee.htm

I thought Uniform Life Table was used in year of death; switch to Single Life Table the year after.