Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

We have a nonaccount balance plan (i.e. a defined benefit plan) that is a top-hat plan.  Under the Plan, a participant is to receive a set amount per month for life, with a 50% survivor benefit to his spouse for her life.

It appears we can take FICA into account from the offset, since the amount is readily ascertainable under Code Section 3121(v)(2).  I get how that works for the set amount to the employee for life -- we just base FICA on the present value of is benefit.  But how do we deal with the survivor benefit?  Is the present value of that amount also taken into account for FICA purposes on the employee's tax filings?  If so, how does the wife report the payments in the years they are paid?

Thank you!

Posted

The good news is that death benefits from NQ plans are not subject to FICA.  See 26 CFR 31.3121(v)(2)-1(b)(iv).

 - There are two types of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data sets...

Posted

Are the participants paying FICA on each year's accrual?  Normally, this will be less than paying FICA at a later date of receipt.

I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.

Posted

In general, I think there are 3 alternative ways in which FICA income attributable to a NQ db plan can be recognized:

  1. the pv of each year's vested accrual is included in the participant's FICA income for that year, with a true-up in the year the benefit becomes ascertainable (e.g., year of employment termination or year of benefit commencement)
  2. the pv of the entire vested benefit is included in the participant's FICA income all-at-once in the year the benefit becomes ascertainable
  3. the amount paid as a benefit is included in the participant's FICA income in the year paid -- i.e., in the same year as it is included for income tax purposes.

I took it that the original poster was using method 1. or 2. and was asking whether pv should reflect the value of potential payments to the spouse after the participant's death. XTitan said no. I agree ...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use