Jump to content

Kirk Maldonado

Silent Keyboards
  • Posts

    2,391
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kirk Maldonado

  1. The legislative history of the Retirement Equity Act of 1984 (which added the QDRO rules) expressly states that QDROs are binding on successor plans.
  2. It would seem that you need to look to see if you have a partial termination issue here.
  3. I agree with Carol. In my experience, the domestic partner generally does not qualify as a dependent.
  4. There are a number of private letter rulings from the IRS holding that the employee is subject to federal income tax on the value of the coverage provided to the domestic partner.
  5. What I've always told my clients to do in this situation is to tell the employee that if he does not repay the amounts within a fixed period (such as one week), the company will issue him a Form 1099 reporting that amount as taxable income. This has always worked in getting the employee to repay the amounts.
  6. Doesn't the SPD mention the deadline? If it does and the employee was given the SPD, I agree with Kip Kraus.
  7. TIR 1408 used to be contained in the CCH Pension Plan Guide. But I no longer have that service, so I can't verify that it is still in their materials.
  8. Under Section 457(f), at the time the benefits vest, the employee is taxed on them. If the employee is already taxed on those amounts, forfeiting them would be pretty draconian. Why isn't the plan designed so that the person gets the benefit at the time of vesting, so that the person has the money to pay the taxes on those benefits?
  9. Having known and worked with RLL for many years, I think his assessment of the situation is generally accurate.
  10. How about hiring an attorney to file an interpleader action (which would involve depositing the money with the court and asking the court to decide who gets the money)?
  11. What are the adverse tax consequences of providing STD benefits that discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees?
  12. Why not pay it to the employee's estate?
  13. Tell her to change her name?
  14. A bit of clarification, a bit off-point perhaps. My recollection of the applicable regulations is that you do not have Section 404© for participant-directed investments in privately held employer stock.
  15. Christine: You should know me better than that. How can I ignore an opportunity like that?
  16. Merlin: Isthespacebaronyourcomputermalfunctioning?
  17. Remember that, in general, both parents must be employed to qualify. Thus, if one of the spouses does not work, the expense is not reimbursable. (There are limited exceptions if the spouse is a full-time student or unable to care for himself or herself.)
  18. The House Committee Report on P.L. 100-667 provides as follows: {I}f under State law the qualified beneficiaries are entitled in one respect to greater benefits than under the [COBRA] health care continuation rules such that compliance with State law automatically means compliance with the health care continuation rules, the State law rule becomes the operative rule with respect to that aspect.
  19. Stan: Don't you think that state laws are preempted?
  20. I've seen the amount of the deductible determined as a percentage of the employee's compensation.
  21. If all of the "contributions" to the plan were made by means of dividends, it would seem that there wouldn't be "substanial and recurring" contributions to the plan. (I realize that this isn't the fact pattern you stated, but this point is not wholly unrelated.)
  22. SLuskin: Does the change occur automatically, or does the employee have to give written notice for the deductions to stop? If the deductions are supposed to stop automatically, how does the employer find out about the changes (if it doesn't receive notice from the employee)?
  23. Just to amplify RLL's response somewhat, there must be a new valuation done each year for purposes of the sale.
  24. Full vesting is not required upon the merger of two defined contribution plans, provided the requirements of Section 414(l) are satisfied. Q&A-16 & 18, TIR 1408, October 30, 1975.
  25. No more rulings on whether amounts paid from a tax-qualified retirement plan will qualify for the exclusion for parsonage allowance under Section 107. Rev. Proc. 91-3, Section 5.06.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use