Many practitioners will point to the 2007 403(b) regs (the “new regs” as many of us often still call them, 16 years later…) as being a real seminal moment in the market, and probably rightfully so. However, an even more fundamental development occurred some 7 or 8 years earlier, which still has deep reverberations in
One of the inevitable results of Congress’s failure to cobble together some sort of compromise on what the most suitable “Securities Fix” would be for the 403(b) CIT is a flurry of activity to find some way to craft a solution which would permit 403(b) plans’ investments in 81-100 trusts without a statutory fix. From
One of the more curious circumstances under SECURE 2.0 arises from Act Section 128, which purports to permit 403(b) plan custodial accounts to invest in interests in Collective Investment Trusts (CITs), referred to as “81-100” group trusts in the Act.
Section 128 fixed that part of problem, as it amended the Code to permit the investment of 403(b) assets in group trusts, alongside mutual funds. But, as the Senate Finance Committee noted in its own Committee Report to the EARN Act, “In order to permit 403(b) plans to participate in a group trust, certain revisions to the securities laws will be required.” Those necessary revisions, however, never made it into SECURE 2.0
Continue Reading Secure 2.0’s Unresolved 403(b) CIT Securities Law Issue
When we assess how to implement the tremendous changes that we see on the horizon, whether it be implementing unique lifetime income vehicles, PEPs, collective trusts, or any other of the sort of the innovative programs being develop which are designed to enhance retirement security. Putting them all into play requires attention to this obscure detail.
Continue Reading The “Entity” Difference Between 403(b) and 401(a) Plans
Congress is taking a well crafted, though pretty unusual, approach to the manner in which it has chosen to allow 403(b) plans to participate in PEPs. It is doing so in a way which seems to be a recognition of the impact of the details that associate to these sorts of dramatic changes. What is noteworthy is that 403(b) PEPs are going to be enabled through changes to 403(b), and not by simply including them in the definitional sections of 413(e), and through changes to ERISA’s PEP language under Sections 3(43) and 3(44). This is critically important because had Congress chosen to simply amend 413(e), it would have opened a Pandora’s box of details which would have demanded clumsy (and perhaps extensive) regulatory fixes.
Continue Reading SECURE 2.0’s 403(b) PEP Rules Will Be, Well, Different…..
With all of the current focus on unique programs designed to enhance the attractiveness to participants and fiduciaries of adopting lifetime income programs under defined contribution plans, there is little discussion about how all of this plays out in the 403(b) market. Guarantee lifetime payouts from 403(b) annuity contracts are still alive and well, particularly in the higher eduction market which is still dominated by TIAA and its insurance products. However, with the the now-decade-long-shift in the 403(b) market to the mutual fund based group custodial arrangements designed to mimic 401(k), where do those new lifetime income programs fit?
Continue Reading 403(b) and Lifetime Income
You may’ve noticed that the SECURE Act introduced yet another new twist to the 403(b) world: the Qualified Plan Distribution Annuity Contract (“QPDAC”-you may want to look at my prior blog related to these lifetime income acronyms). Its not that Congress was singly out 403(b) plans, as 401(a) and 457(b) plansnow also have the ability to distribute QPDAC. But, as in all other things 403(b)s, there are a number of unique twists to the rules which exist solely in the 403(b) world.
Continue Reading The 403(b) “Qualified Plan Distribution Annuity Contract” Under SECURE Section 109
Nevin Adams, dropped another one of his gems (this one on cryptocurrency and “innovations” in self-directed brokerage accounts) while I was drafting this piece on 403(b) SDBAs, making my piece even more timely. Its a striking case in point of another unique feature showing the differences between 403(b) plans and 401(k) plans: Not
Mike Webb, (formerly of Cammack Consulting, now being part of Captrust) who has been one of the true 403(b) thought leaders in the country for a number of years, runs a podcast series called called “Revamping Retirment.” Mike wanted to have a conversation with me about annuities. We do talk about 403(b)’s in the video, of course, but also of many other annuities issues, like the reluctance of sponsors to take up lifetime income, the value of annuities as well as their problems as they are currently being sold in the market. This resulted in a refreshing 22 minutes of great conversation.
Continue Reading A Frank-and Fun-Conversation on Annuities with Mike Webb
The minute differences between 403(b) plans and 401(k) plans are often inconvenient, at best, and sometimes they produce serious conundrums in plan administration which can be difficult to resolve.
Prominent among these is the issue of “small amount” cash-outs from 403(b) plans. The ability to cash out small amounts for terminated participants is especially important for a number of “small plan” filers, who are on the cusp of having to comply with the large plan audit rules because of long lost terminated employees with individual contracts who are still counted int the plan’s census-even after eliminating those you can under Rev. Proc. 2007-71.
Continue Reading A Technical Analysis of How “Small Amount” Cash-Outs Under 403(b) Plans Work