 |
Here are the most recently added topics on the BenefitsLink® Message Boards:
|
|
Bird created a topic in Retirement Plans in General
"I thought that NJ only allowed deductions for 401(k) contributions for self-employed individuals; i.e. not for profit sharing, match or defined benefit contributions. (I was going to say "always thought..." but honestly didn't think about it until we learned the hard way when a client's deductions were disallowed. It wasn't my problem but the accountant had some 'splaining to do.) Now I get the
following message from an accountant, saying that everything is deductible: Quote I always thought [that] the employer contributions for the owner , which are based on net income and discretionary, were not deductible, only the 401k deferral is deductible for NJ purposes. The below paragraph was sent to a colleague directly from NJ Taxation Regulatory Services Any amounts contributed to a 401(k) plan by a sole proprietor on behalf of
employees or on his or her behalf as an employee receive tax-deferred treatment and are deductible to the same extent as for federal income tax under N.J.S.A. 54A: 6-21. New Jersey follows the federal contribution limits, and elective deferral, employer match, and profit sharing contribution are all deductible. New Jersey agrees that $64,500 ($58,000 + $6,500) is the correct amount for those 50 and older in the 2021 tax year. Here is
the statute cited: N.J. Stat. § 54A:6-21 (“Gross income shall not include amounts contributed by an employer on behalf of and at the election of an employee to a trust which is part of a qualified cash or deferred arrangement which meets the requirements of Section 401(k) of the 1954 Internal Revenue Code, as amended. N.J.S. § 54A:6-21”) I thought that there was a different cite, which, when read narrowly, didn't
permit self-employed individuals to deduct anything other than actual 401(k) contributions, but it's on a piece of paper somewhere and I'll never find it. Any thoughts about this?"
|
|
khn created a topic in 401(k) Plans
"What should be done if a plan sponsor realizes a fund change notice has not been distributed 30 days prior to the change? The change is happening tomorrow and is already in process, it can't be stopped. Should they distribute the notice today even though it's only a day prior?"
|
|
sb0828 created a topic in 401(k) Plans
"What is your interpretation of the new automatic enrollment rules under SECURE 2.0 for a plan being established as a QACA? Do the new rules (i.e., 3% minimum default; auto increases of 1% per year up to 10%, and not more than 15%, if default % is less than 10%) need to be applied to the plan, or can you abide by the old rules for QACA (i.e., any % for a default; auto increases of 1% per year up to 6%, and not more than 15%, if
default % is less than 6%)?"
|
|
Mr Bagwell created a topic in 401(k) Plans
"Employer did not setup payroll correctly for deferrals at beginning of 2023. I am working on the EPCRS fix. The scenario: The employee intends to get to 30,000 deferrals for 2023. So the employee would likely get full deferrals for 2023 plus a QNEC for the Employer error. This feels a little funky to me, but I am fine with it otherwise. I'm not aware of any reduction of deferral limit because the EPCRS fix was done."
|
|
BG5150 created a topic in 403(b) Plans, Accounts or Annuities
"I know 403(b) Plans don't file a 5330 for late deposit of deferrals and loans, but do they have to do one for late refunds of the ACP test?"
|
|
Peter Gulia created a topic in 401(k) Plans
"Employers might have a range of views about whether a plan should allow a hardship distribution on no more showing than the participant’s certification. But some employers welcome this opportunity to simplify a plan’s administration. And a recordkeeper or third-party administrator that provides a service of vetting hardship claims (whether as the § 3(16) decision-maker, under a nondiscretionary procedure the
administrator instructed, or as a preliminary look before the administrator decides) might welcome this opportunity to lower its operating costs. Yet, some recordkeepers are unready to switch to the participant-certification regime, even with a customer plan administrator’s written instruction. They say they don’t want to implement the change until there is Treasury or Internal Revenue Service guidance. What are they
worried about? Is any big recordkeeper allowing hardships on the participant’s certification?"
|
Here are the most recently posted jobs on EmployeeBenefitsJobs.com, a service of BenefitsLink:
|
|
|
 |
 |
Lois Baker, J.D., President
David Rhett Baker, J.D., Editor and Publisher
Copyright 2023 BenefitsLink.com, Inc. All materials contained in this mailing are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of BenefitsLink.com, Inc., or in the case of third party materials, the owner of those materials. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notices from copies of the content.
Links to web sites other than BenefitsLink.com and EmployeeBenefitsJobs.com are offered as a service to our readers; we were not involved in their production and are not responsible for their content.
|
 |