January, 2008 Technical Newsletter Provided by Leimberg Information Services
See
other issues.
Beneficiary Rollover Seesaw Saga Continues
In our first
LISI Employee Benefits and Retirement
Planning Newsletter of 2008, Natalie B. Choate of Bingham McCutchen,
LLP, Boston, author of
Life
and Death Planning for Retirement Benefits and
The
QPRT Manual (both books available through
http://www.ataxplan.com/ ) ponders,
"Will beneficiary rollovers
be mandatory on plans in 2008—or not?"
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY:
Earlier this year, it
appeared that non-spouse beneficiary rollovers would be made mandatory on
plans beginning in 2008.
That was then, this is now.
Both Congress and the IRS
seem to have backed off, leaving us with the "Notice 2007-7" status quo still
in place:
Plans do not have to
offer beneficiary rollovers after all!
FACTS:
BACKGROUND:
As reported in
LISI's Employee Benefits & Retirement Planning Newsletter # 432 (10/23/07),
under the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (PPA 2006), effective for 2007 and
later years, the "designated beneficiary" of a decedent's qualified, 403(b),
or 457 plan can open an "inherited IRA" (which isn't really inherited) in the
name of the deceased plan participant, and payable to the beneficiary. IRC §
402(c)(11).
Then, the plan sends the
lump sum distribution to the newly-created "inherited" IRA via plan-to-plan
transfer, and presto the beneficiary can have his life expectancy payout (from
the "inherited" IRA), even though that was not a permitted form of
distribution under the plan he or she actually inherited.
Though some practitioners
read § 402(c)(11) as requiring plans to allow such "beneficiary rollovers,"
the IRS disagreed. IRS Notice 2007-7 provided that plans would not be required
to allow beneficiary rollovers. The plan could allow the beneficiary rollover,
or not, depending on the plan's whim.
WHAT HAPPENED NEXT:
The IRS's interpretation
seemed contrary to Congressional intent. If plans were not required to offer
the beneficiary rollover, some (many?) plans would choose not to offer it, and
nonspouse beneficiaries would be right back where they were before PPA
2006—stuck with a non-rollable immediately-taxable lump sum distribution.
Then, in August 2007, the
"Pension Protection Technical Corrections Act of 2007" (S. 1974), was
introduced in Congress, making "technical and clarifying changes" to PPA 2006.
If enacted, this
legislation would have made it clear that plans were required to offer
the beneficiary rollover, by adding to § 401(a)(31)(D) a statement that the
term "eligible rollover distribution" included distributions under §
402(c)(11). (Plans are required to offer "direct rollovers" of eligible
rollover distributions; § 401(a)(31)(B).) Inclusion of this provision in a
technical corrections bill led to a strong inference that this is what
Congress had intended all along.
The IRS swiftly responded:
In its list of "2007 Cumulative and Interim Amendments," posted at the IRS
website in August 2007, the IRS included the following paragraph:
"§ 402(c)(11)
[Discretionary]: PPA '06 § 829(a)(1) added § 402(c)(11) to allow non-spouse
beneficiaries to roll over distributions from a qualified plan to an
individual retirement plan. Non-spouse beneficiary rollovers are an optional
plan provision for 2007. See, Notice 2007-7. Pursuant to an impending
technical correction, non-spouse beneficiary rollovers will be required for
plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2008. See, section 9(e) of S.
1974, the Pension Protection Technical Corrections Act of 2007, as introduced
in the Senate on August 2, 2007 and section 9(e) of H.R. 3361, the Pension
Protection Technical Corrections Act of 2007, as introduced in the House of
Representatives on August 3, 2007."
Emphasis added.
This seemed to say that the
IRS, now that it understood Congress's intent as clarified by the proposed
legislation, would start requiring plans to offer beneficiary rollovers
in 2008.
However, it now appears
that the IRS was merely reciting what the technical corrections bill said…and
not in any way implying that the IRS would go along with this expression of
Congressional intent if not forced to do so.
Summer has turned into
winter. The leaves have disappeared, and the August version of technical
corrections went with them.
THE LATEST – BUT NOT -
GREATEST:
A new version of technical
corrections is now proposed in Congress, the "Tax Technical Corrections Bill
of 2007" (S. 2374, H.R. 4195). The new version says nothing about
beneficiary rollovers; the provision clarifying that beneficiary rollovers are
mandatory on plans is gone without a trace. And the IRS has issued its annual
list of amendments that qualified retirement plans must adopt in order to stay
qualified, Notice 2007-94.
For guidance on
implementing beneficiary rollovers, this "2007 Cumulative List of Changes in
Plan Qualification Requirements" refers only to Notice 2007-7…which of course
says that beneficiary rollovers are optional for the plan. There is no mention
of mandatory beneficiary rollovers coming in 2008 or any other time.
WHY PLANS DON'T OFFER
BENEFICIARIES ROLLOVERS?
Why don't plans want to
offer the beneficiary rollover? For some employers and plan administrators,
it's just one more thing to worry about. It's easier for the plan to write a
check to the named beneficiary than to get involved with transferring funds to
an inherited IRA.
For a while it looked like
Congress had really fixed the problem of inherited lump-sum-only plans, but
now this feels like the oldest movie plot in the book: It was all just a
dream!
Who needs the beneficiary
rollover anyway? Why, only the children of parents who die prematurely (and
parents of children who die prematurely).
Most people don't die while
they still have money in a 401(k) plan. Most people survive to retire and roll
their benefits over to an IRA; and beneficiaries who inherit an IRA can always
get a life expectancy payout, because all IRAs offer it.
THE DOUBLE WHAMMY
PROBLEM:
But for the survivors of
those who are unfortunate enough to die while still working, there will
continue to be a double whammy:
First, you lost your parent (child, sibling, friend) at a far-too-young age,
and to add insult to injury…
Second, you have no option other than an immediately taxable lump sum
distribution of your loved one's pension benefits.
Yes, the Code says you can
take a life expectancy payout.
But that's only if the plan
chooses to offer that form of benefit—and most do not offer it.
Yes, the Code says the
benefits can be transferred to an inherited IRA.
But that's only if the plan
chooses to offer such rollovers (apparently)—and many will choose not
to offer them.
BOTTOM LINE:
For now, beneficiary
rollovers continue to be optional with the plan, and there is nothing
on the horizon that will change that.
Should we be surprised that
the plan administrator lobby is stronger than the lobby for beneficiaries of
those who die prematurely?
HOPE THIS HELPS YOU HELP
OTHERS MAKE A POSITIVE DIFFERENCE!
Natalie Choate
CITE AS:
LISI Employee
Benefits and Retirement Planning Newsletter # 438 (January 1, 2008) at
http://www.leimbergservices.com/
Copyright 2007 Leimberg Information Services, Inc. (LISI). Reproduction in
ANY Form or Forwarding to ANY Person Prohibited – Without Express Permission.
CITES:
§ 402(c)(11), added to the
Code by § 829(a)(1) of PPA 2006; IRS Notice 2007-7, 2007-5 I.R.B. 395 (January
2007); IRS list of "2007 Cumulative and Interim Amendments" posted at
http://www.irs.gov/retirement/article/0,,id=173372,00.html (if you have
trouble finding this item on the irs.gov website, try searching the term
"2007-7," then sort your results by date); and Notice 2007-94, 2007-51 I.R.B.
1179.
The author thanks
LISI Member Michelle O'Haren for
catching this latest IRS flip-flop.
Your local EPC may have already purchased a
Leimberg membership on your behalf.
|