2004 Form 1099-R Instructions vs. 2003 Form 1099-R Instructions

[Guest disvaclub]

The distribution code explanations changed for "2". In 2003, it highlighted Section 72(t), (q), and (v). In 2004, it is silent in regards to those sections.

Does this mean that if you are set-up under 72(t) - that now we are required to report your distribution code as a "1" - if you are under 59.5?

[Guest Derelict]

72(t) will now be 7 or 1 depending on age....

This is going to cause chaos for sure!

How many people out there can back up their 72(t) payment 100% to the IRS..? haha I like it

[Guest disvaclub]

Thanks - I just wanted to make sure that I was reading it correctly.

I guess the IRS was receiving pressure from institutions to not have monitor 72(t).

Wait until customers get a load of this. :angry:

[Appleby]

Don’t break out the champagne just yet.

In many instances, the forms and instructions change several times before the date by which are required.

[Guest Derelict]

Don’t break out the champagne just yet.

In many instances, the forms and instructions change several times before the date by which are required.

Very true indeed but this does seem to follow along a trend by the Service to begin to actually try to police these things. Similar to what they did with RMDs... Simplify the rules to make sure everyone could do it.... Then required information reporting...

[Appleby]

Good point Derelict

It seems to makes sense too. How many custodians really track the payments to make sure they meet requirements ? Anyone, anyone? I see no show of hands just kidding

[Guest disvaclub]

Here is a hand. We are programmed for this - now we have to just turn off the programming. If we cannot code it as a 2, why bother monitoring at all?

[Appleby]

Update. The instructions have been changed to include SEPPs in Code 2...and mentions 72(q), (t), and (v)

See http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=109875,00.html

[Guest Derelict]

Very annoying but not very suprising. They really need to consult IRPAC & others before they decide these changes... not after the fact (and mid year).

[Guest disvaclub]

Thanks Appleby!!!

Derelict - I agree - they have to take a more proactive and reach out before making a change - not reactive approach - by looking like idiots.

[Appleby]

It appears that the final version of the instructions does not include SEPPs in Code 2 . I am seeing right?

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1099r.pdf

[Appleby]

Please ignore that prior post ...It has been a long week!

[Appleby]

…but it seems Code T no longer includes SEPPs. As you can probably tell- we are getting ready for 1099-R reporting

[Guest Derelict]

lol

That's just great.

Flip floppers!