Tom Posted November 4, 2024 Posted November 4, 2024 So anyone who is 61, 61, 62 or 63 as of 12/31/2025 can do the super catchup for a total deferral of $34,750. Is it that simple? Anyone know why SECURE limited it to that odd age group? Thank you
Peter Gulia Posted November 4, 2024 Posted November 4, 2024 The political speculation is that providing the bigger catch-up amount beyond 63-year-olds would result in more revenue loss than the appropriations bill then would bear. Paul I and Bill Presson 2 Peter Gulia PC Fiduciary Guidance Counsel Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 215-732-1552 Peter@FiduciaryGuidanceCounsel.com
CuseFan Posted November 4, 2024 Posted November 4, 2024 or what I said in response to Peter's subsequent question. Paul I 1 Kenneth M. Prell, CEBS, ERPA Vice President, BPAS Actuarial & Pension Services kprell@bpas.com
401king Posted November 5, 2024 Posted November 5, 2024 Ages 60, 61, 62 or 63 at year-end. (Adding age 60) R. Alexander
Gilmore Posted November 5, 2024 Posted November 5, 2024 7 hours ago, 401king said: Ages 60, 61, 62 or 63 at year-end. Which stinks for someone turning 63 on 12/31/2024. They go all of 2025 age 63 with the exception of one day.
Bri Posted November 5, 2024 Posted November 5, 2024 37 minutes ago, Gilmore said: Which stinks for someone turning 63 on 12/31/2024. They go all of 2025 age 63 with the exception of one day. Yes, but wouldn't their parents have gotten the tax deduction for having the kid born by year-end?
Peter Gulia Posted November 5, 2024 Posted November 5, 2024 For a greater age-based catch-up deferral amount that might be permitted because the participant is treated as age 60, 61, 62, or 63, the Internal Revenue Code refers to “an eligible participant who would attain age 60 but would not attain age 64 before the close of the taxable year[.]” I.R.C. § 414(v)(2)(B)(i) (emphasis added). About Gilmore’s observation: After the first few years § 414(v)(2)(B)(i) applies, its measure that burdens a participant who reaches age 64 by her taxable year’s close might have benefitted that participant who as a 59-year-old for most of a year enjoyed a greater age-based catch-up deferral amount because she then “would attain age 60 . . . before the close of [her] taxable year[.]” (I assume the participant’s taxable year is constant for opening and closing the 60-63 years.) Yet, I could join a “This stinks!” chorus as one who aged out before the provision becomes applicable. Peter Gulia PC Fiduciary Guidance Counsel Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 215-732-1552 Peter@FiduciaryGuidanceCounsel.com
MoJo Posted November 6, 2024 Posted November 6, 2024 14 hours ago, Peter Gulia said: Yet, I could join a “This stinks!” chorus as one who aged out before the provision becomes applicable. Ditto....
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now