jlf Posted August 6, 1999 Posted August 6, 1999 THE SERVICE STATES AT IX A (3) ROLLOVERS THAT: "UNLIKE TRANSFERS, THERE MUST BE A DISTRIBUTABLE EVENT UNDER THE PLAN OR CONTRACT TO HAVE AN ELIGIBLE ROLLOVER DISTRIBUTION." WHAT TYPE OF EVENTS ARE THEY REFERRING TO OTHER THAN THE TRIGGERING EVENTS FOR EARLY DISTRIBUTIONS ENUMERATED IN SECTIONS 403(B)(7)(A)(ii) and 403(b)11? RECOGNIZING THEIR OWN INFORMATION LETTER OF MAY,1995, WHERE THEY TOOK THE POSITION THAT POST-1988 SALARY REDUCTION AMOUNTS TO A 403(B)1 contract are subject to the events of 403(b)11 in order to be an eligible rollover distribution UNDER 403(B)8 and 402©4; don't you find it strange that they don't re-state their position and that of the ruling in FRANK V ARRONSSON; COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 2ND CIRCUIT; 96-9456? ------------------ [This message has been edited by jlf (edited 08-05-99).]
Guest CVCalhoun Posted August 7, 1999 Posted August 7, 1999 Looks like a couple of notes disappeared here. I'm therefore reposting them below: ---------------------------------------- Ellie Lowder posted 08-06-99 18:17 ET (US) ---------------------------------------- Because you must first be eligible for a distribution (i.e., 59½, separated from service, have unrestricted values) before you have an eligible rollover distribution. Otherwise, you would move 403(B) money through RR-9024, tax-free transfers. ---------------------------------------- jlf posted 08-06-99 16:51 ET (US) ---------------------------------------- Why do the guidelines refer to a "distributable event under the plan" when referring to "eligible rollover distributions"? ---------------------------------------- jlf posted 08-05-99 20:26 ET (US) ---------------------------------------- THE SERVICE STATES AT IX A (3) ROLLOVERS THAT: "UNLIKE TRANSFERS, THERE MUST BE A DISTRIBUTABLE EVENT UNDER THE PLAN OR CONTRACT TO HAVE AN ELIGIBLE ROLLOVER DISTRIBUTION." WHAT TYPE OF EVENTS ARE THEY REFERRING TO OTHER THAN THE TRIGGERING EVENTS FOR EARLY DISTRIBUTIONS ENUMERATED IN SECTIONS 403(B)(7)(A)(ii) and 403(b)11? RECOGNIZING THEIR OWN INFORMATION LETTER OF MAY,1995, WHERE THEY TOOK THE POSITION THAT POST-1988 SALARY REDUCTION AMOUNTS TO A 403(B)1 contract are subject to the events of 403(b)11 in order to be an eligible rollover distribution UNDER 403(B)8 and 402©4; don't you find it strange that they don't re-state their position and that of the ruling in FRANK V ARRONSSON; COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 2ND CIRCUIT; 96-9456? [Note: This message has been edited by CVCalhoun]
jlf Posted August 9, 1999 Author Posted August 9, 1999 The ASPA SAYS THAT THE PENSION BILL RECENTLY PASSED BY THE CONGRESS PERMITS ROLLOVERS AMONG VARIOUS TYPES OF DC PLANS "WITHOUT RESTRICTION". DOES THIS MEAN THAT ROLLOVERS TO AND FROM 403(b)PLANS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE EARLY DISTRIBUTION TRIGGERING EVENTS OF 403(B)(7)(A)(ii) and or 403(b)11? ------------------
jlf Posted August 9, 1999 Author Posted August 9, 1999 The ASPA SAYS THAT THE PENSION BILL RECENTLY PASSED BY THE CONGRESS PERMITS ROLLOVERS AMONG VARIOUS TYPES OF DC PLANS "WITHOUT RESTRICTION". DOES THIS MEAN THAT ROLLOVERS TO AND FROM 403(b)PLANS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE EARLY DISTRIBUTION TRIGGERING EVENTS OF 403(B)(7)(A)(ii) and or 403(b)11? ------------------
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.