Robert Richter, now of ARA and chief editor of the EOB, has weighed ion my posting on the suspension of the due date of loan repayment. I had posited that it is effectively is the participants choice, as the specific language of the statute declares that “such due date shall be delayed for 1 year” -when combined with the need of the participant to certify COVID stays-effectively means an employee has the right to continue payments or not. I also suggested that the language of the statute means that the employer has no authority to impose a due date. He pointed out that the IRS may end up not agreeing, if past is prescient.
Continue Reading CARE Act Suspension of Loan Repayments: Is it the Employer’s or the Participant’s Choice?
Legislation
The CARES Act Participant Loan Payment Suspension Rules Take an Unusual Approach in Making the Change; 403(b) Policy Loans Affected Differently
The structure and the language used by the drafters of the CARE Act in their crafting of the new participant loan repayment suspension rules seem to be both rare and stunningly broad: it appears to mandate, as a matter of federal law, that each loan repayment due through December 31, 2020 by COVID qualifying participants are suspended for one year.
This is actually a big deal. Section 2202(b)(2) of the CARES act, which mandates the suspension, did fool with the amortization schedules, or the timing and taxation of defaults under Section 72(p) of the Tax Code, which is the section which governs the tax aspects of loans. In fact, it did not amend Section 72(p) at all. Nor did it amend any part of ERISA Section 408(b)(1), which hold the ERISA rules governing loans.
Continue Reading The CARES Act Participant Loan Payment Suspension Rules Take an Unusual Approach in Making the Change; 403(b) Policy Loans Affected Differently
The Immediate COVID-19 Retirement Fix Which Congress Missed in the Great Recession: Temporarily Suspend the 10% Early Distribution Penalty Tax
It seems that if policy makers want to have an impactful effect, suspend this tax during this crisis. I would not disagree with my economist friends who may now caution against this seemingly rash move; to consider its long term impact; and to be concerned about the depletion of long term retirement savings. I am particularly sensitive to these concerns, of course, and they are valid.It becomes a question of how to balance competing economic interests, but I suspect the widespread impact of that 10% penalty may weigh in favor of its temporary suspension.
Continue Reading The Immediate COVID-19 Retirement Fix Which Congress Missed in the Great Recession: Temporarily Suspend the 10% Early Distribution Penalty Tax
Sweeping 403(b) Changes in Portman-Cardin Legislation Leaves Unanswered Questions
The Portman-Cardin Bill, the “Retirement Security and Savings Act of 2019,” introduces sweeping changes to 403(b) plans by expanding their investment universe. These changes, however, also required modification to the Securities Laws otherwise applicable to 403(b) plans in order for them to work. A few, critical, issues have gone unanswered in the legislation, and there are a number of transition issues which we will have to be addressed.
Continue Reading Sweeping 403(b) Changes in Portman-Cardin Legislation Leaves Unanswered Questions