Harwood

Some of the discussion here is relevant to the question: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?act=ST&f=20&t=25199

One of my June 30, 2004 account statements had this: A Message from Fidelity Plan participants involved in excess trading or market timing of Fidelity mutual funds may be subject to a 3-month suspension of their trading privileges. This suspension is intended to protect the interests of all shareholders from activities that are disruptive to the fund. It is important that you understand the terms and conditions of investing in a mutual fund by carefully reading the fund's prospectus.

UCLA seems to have a donation-of-hours program. http://www.chr.ucla.edu/chr/ppaa/uclaproc/append3.htm

ASPA used to sell old exams for $17 each. June 1999 is the last exam they sold before stopping that practice.

A cartoon recently referred to Northern California as "Baja Oregon"

I take it the plan in question credits service pre-ERISA and that crediting the years 1965 to 1967 would make a difference in the person's benefit [45 years-of-service is better than 43]

MWeddell - Thanks for updating us. It is appreciated!

Not sure what the US Dept of Labor Relations is. Probably unrelated to your question: Section 89 was an infamous section of the Internal Revenue Code that was going to require extensive testing and reporting on certain employer-provided benefit plans. Thankfully this section of the IRC of 1986 was repealed.

Virtually all employers/sponsors want to get Alternate Payee money out of the plan. So every prototype document I have seen has a clause allowing an Alternate Payee to take an immediate distribution at any time, if authorized by the QDRO.

Many plans mandate cash outs for terminees who have reached the plan's Normal Retirement Age, or age 62 if greater. No consent is needed, only information about rollover rights. Check the plan document.

ERISA Outline Book on "Nonqualified stock option - income includible in year of exercise": Excluded from Current includible compensation and safe harbor Included for W-2 and 3401(a). For "Nonqualified stock option includible in income in year granted": Included for Current includible compensation; W-2; 3401(a) Excluded from safe harbor

The opinion letter from the auditor tells the answer [which, in this case, I sure is limited]

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?act=ST&f=20&t=25199

Is the employer at fault for not making deductions? Some prior thread discussed possibilities in that scenario.

The leave-of-absence solution sounds reasonable, if it meets the company's criteria of what a leave-of-absence is. Normally when one is on a paid leave of absence, one does not have another full-time employer [in this case the U.S. military].

"Expanding" on what MGB wrote: Supplemental military pay while employee is on temporary Reserve duty is treated as normal W-2 wages. Active duty means the person is no longer an employee. Any supplemental military payments over $600 go on a 1099-MISC with no withholdings. If the employer allows an active duty employee to continue to participant in benefit plans, the IRS may contend that the person is still employed and therefore should have W-2 wages. This is the problem area. Look for Revenue Rulings 69-136 and 68-238 at http://www.taxlinks.com/rulings/findinglist/revrulmaster.htm

Our form for our clients includes this: "Your request may include an additional amount to cover anticipated tax liability associated with this withdrawal. Your employer may require evidence to support this additional amount. "

Isn't the original question asking if the loan balance is considered part of the vested balance?

Personally, I don't like to dictate vesting in a QDRO Procedure. However, the issue should be dealt with in every QDRO where the Participant is not 100% vested. Three options for when vesting is calculated: 1. The date of separation/divorce. 2. The date the assets are actually segregated and/or the date Alternate Payee takes a distribution. 3. [rarely seen but useful]: Vesting is not calculated until the Participant becomes 100% vested or has terminated employment.

I had one Plan Administrator who reasoned that since the QDRO gave the Alternate Payee investment gain/loss from the date of the split to the date of segregation of assets, the calculation for the Alternate Payee's share would also take into account any additional Participant vesting up to the date of segregation. A creative concept. [Thankfully, some QDROs specifically spell out how to handle the vesting issue]

I was confused about tax-free transfers for a non-spouse beneficiary until I stumbled upon this is Publication 590: "However, you can make a trustee-to-trustee transfer as long as the IRA into which amounts are being moved is set up and maintained in the name of the deceased IRA owner for the benefit of you as beneficiary."

Seems like Christine's and K man's situations are entirely different - French citizens living in France as opposed to foreign migrants - resident aliens working in the U.S.

The Notices at this site seem to only go back to 1990; the 1995 Announcement you seek is there. http://www.legalbitstream.com/irs_materials.asp?pl=i1

I am not paying close enough attention. May 17 is wrong.

PJB - you are right that comp is for the full year. I missed the fact that this was not a calendar year plan. Still I wonder: just because the rehire immediately re-enters the plans, do the regulations and rulings require that they be allowed to file a deferral election form? On-going participants are often limited to changing their deferral percentage at a quarterly entry date. Can't a prior participant who becomes re-eligible mid-quarter be made to wait to defer until the next entry date, if provided for in the plan document. [Of course some payroll departments leave a deferral percentage in the employee's "master control" and the deferrals start up "automatically" upon rehire.]