
|
|

|
August 22, 2000
This Week, Ted Tackles: How do you determine whether an employee is highly compensated? ... I'm doing 10-year averaging for my taxes; should I take a lump sum from my 401(k)? ... Are the annuity calculations for IRAs the same as for 401(k)s? ... When I took my 401(k) loan there was no fee; we changed trustees and now there is one. Why do I have to pay it? ý Can I use my 401(k) money to buy a house? ý Is it legal for my husband's company to exclude him, a sales rep, from its profit-sharing plan?
|
Question: I administer our company's 401(k) plan and I
can't find the answer to this question. If we hire an employee this year who will earn an
estimated $90,000, is he a highly compensated or nonhighly compensated employee this year?
Since we use a look-back year to determine this and this is a new employee who has no
prior wages, what category should I have him in? I must let him know if he will be limited
to the 12 percent for HCE or allowed the whole 20 percent, which our NHCEs are allowed.
TB: The rules regarding how employees
are separated into the highly and nonhighly compensated groupings are somewhat complex.
You must first begin by identifying the plan year that will be tested. In your case, this
is the 2000 plan year. The highly compensated employees for the testing year 2000 must
include all employees who own at least 5 percent of the company during either 1999 or
2000, and employees who earned more than $80,000 during 1999. An employee hired this year
who doesn't own stock won't be a highly compensated employee, regardless of how much the
employee earns this year. Certain family members of owners must also be included in the
highly compensated group.
The employee you mentioned in your question doesn't have to be limited to the HCE
percentage for 2000 if he isn't an owner or related to an owner. You mention that he wants
to contribute 20 percent instead of 12 percent. He may do so, but the $10,500 pretax limit
must still be applied. This limit must be reduced by any contributions he made to another
401(k) prior to joining your company.
This employee will become highly compensated if he earns $90,000 during 2000. This will
push him into the HCE group when you do the year 2001 tests. You will need to restrict his
contributions accordingly beginning January 1, 2001.
Question: I'm 65 years old and have just retired. There is
$200,000 in my 401(k) account, which I'm allowed to leave there even though I'm retired.
It's been recommended that I take out the money as a lump sum since I am eligible to use a
special 10-year averaging method for my federal income taxes. I don't plan to be taking
any distributions until I am 70ý. How do you feel about this strategy as compared to
rolling the money into an IRA?
Additionally, I plan to keep the money invested in the same mutual funds regardless of
which method I use. What is your opinion on this?
TB: What is best in my opinion
depends upon the amount of other taxable income you have. If your taxable income is less
than $5,000, a lump sum withdrawal using 10-year income averaging may make sense because
the effective tax rate you will pay on the entire distribution will be at the 15 percent
rate. I suspect this isn't the case since you say you won't need this money to provide an
income at this time. I assume by this fact that your other taxable income is in the
$25,000-plus range. If this is correct, the lump sum will be taxed at the 28 percent rate,
or higher, if you take it now.
The money will benefit from tax-deferred growth if you leave it in the plan or roll it
into an IRA. This is a plus, but if your taxable income remains at the present level or
increases, you will ultimately pay a high level of taxes as you withdraw the money each
year. Uncle Sam will ultimately get a big chunk of this money. The question boils down to
do you want to pay the IRS now or later?
I don't recommend accepting the opinion of a financial advisor whose main interest may be
investing the money you have left after paying the tax. You should have an independent tax
professional do an analysis of the potential tax liability and net benefit results for
both alternatives, if you haven't already done so.
Question: I'm considering retiring from my present employer
before I reach age 55. My plan allows distributions without the 10 percent penalty at an
age less than 55 if a systematic withdrawal plan is used. The distributions must continue
for five years, or until I reach age 59ý, whichever is later. I understand that the IRS
has three specific methods for calculating IRA distributions that are acceptable to avoid
the penalty on an IRA.
1. Do the same IRS methodologies apply to a 401(k) distribution?
2. Where can I find the specific methods for calculating the distributions?
3. Is there a required method to determine the assumed return (such as Prime rate) to be
used in the calculations?
I have looked for the specifics but haven't been able to find them. All the information
I've found refers to the substantially equal payments but doesn't give details. I asked my
fund firm and was told that the distributions must be based on life expectancy and that I
could assume any return. I want to assume a lower return rate so that my 401(k)
distribution will be smaller. I'll only need a small amount to supplement my company
pension/annuity and want the 401(k) to continue to grow for later years of retirement.
TB: The same three methods of
computing the minimum distribution apply to both 401(k) and IRAs. You need to follow the
rules for distribution under Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a)(9). You need to find
someone who has a copy of the code check your local library or a law library. The
interest rate must be reasonable. In the past, the IRS has accepted 120 percent of the
30-year Treasury Bond rate as a reasonable rate. A lower rate should also be acceptable if
the money is invested at a lower rate. For example, if you have the money all invested in
fixed income investments with a 5.5 percent annual return, using this rate should be
reasonable.
Question: I've participated in my firm's 401(k) plan for 10
years and in a Keogh at the firm for about the same time period. Recently our plan was
turned over to a new trustee and both plans are being rolled into one defined-contribution
plan. I have an existing loan against my 401(k) account. At the time the loan was taken
out, there was an application fee paid but no service charge on the loan. During our
introductory meeting with the trustee officers, we were given various brochures to read.
Their literature states that in addition to an application fee they will charge a $10 per
quarter service charge on all loans.
If I didn't have to pay a service charge when I applied for the loan four years ago, why
do I have to pay it in the last year of the loan?
TB: Your employer may legally change
from one administrative organization to another at any time without the approval of
participants. Participants are subject to the fee structure of the new provider, which may
be higher or lower than the prior administrative firm. Most providers charge a loan
administrative fee, so the fact that you did not have to pay such a fee during the past
four years is a plus.
Your employer could, of course, pay this fee for those participants who had existing loans
when the provider was changed. You may want to discuss this possibility with the person at
your firm who handles your plan.
Question: My husband and I are saving for a house. We heard
somewhere that we can roll over my husband's 401(k) into part of a down payment for a
house. Our accountant has told us that this is incorrect. By the time we are ready to
purchase a home in October, we will only have about $2,500 to $3,000 in his account and
about $2,000 in an IRA (in addition to savings). Time (and money) are of the essence, as
we live in the San Francisco Bay Area where home prices can increase as much as $100,000
in only a year's time. What are the facts?
TB: If his plan permits it, your
husband may withdraw the amount in his 401(k) that he has contributed to use to help buy a
primary residence. You should check the summary plan document that was given to him when
he enrolled in his 401(k) plan to see if these withdrawals are permitted.
The amount he withdraws will be taxable at your current tax rate, plus a 10 percent
penalty tax will be imposed if he is under age 59ý. Typically, this means that 35 percent
to 45 percent of the amount withdrawn will be lost in taxes.
Let me suggest a strategy that could help you minimize the tax hit. You should buy the
house and withdraw the money at the beginning of next year rather than the end of this
year. The tax benefits (mortgage interest deduction) gained via home ownership during most
of 2001 will more than offset the tax created by the 401(k) withdrawal. You won't gain
this offsetting tax advantage if you purchase a home close to the end of the year.
Question: My spouse's company amended its profit-sharing
plan, and excluded one group of sales people. This company has several hundred employees
and three different sections of commissioned sales people. Only one section was excluded.
All employees can participate in the 401(k). Can they legally exclude one group from the
profit-sharing plan? Upper management of this group is NOT excluded, just the sales
people. These sales people get W-2's, not 1099s. If we wanted to pursue this, whom would
we contact?
TB: Yes, an employer may legally
exclude a particular group of employees, such as they have done in this instance, if the
group excluded is small compared to the total number of employees.
Ted Benna, creator of the first 401(k) retirement savings
plan, will answer your most intriguing questions every Tuesday. With over 30 years of
experience as an employee benefits consultant, Ted is a nationally recognized expert on
benefits issues. He has authored two books, Helping Employees Achieve Retirement Income
Security and Escaping the Coming Retirement Crisis, and is President of the
401(k) Association. Ted is a frequent speaker at meetings of 401(k) plan sponsors and
participants. His articles and comments have appeared in numerous publications, including The
New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.
Read Ted Benna's Biography
Ted's Table Archives
The information provided here is intended to help you understand the general issue and
does not constitute any tax, investment or legal advice. Consult your financial, tax or
legal advisor regarding your own unique situation and your company's benefits
representative for rules specific to your plan.
401Kafe.com is the premier online community resource for
401(k) participants
Copyright ý 1996 - 2000 mPower. All Rights Reserved.
|