The IRS has now issued Notice 2025-67, setting forth section 415 and several other IRS limits for 2026. Maximum employee deferrals under a 401(k) plan went up from $23,500 to $24,500. Catch-ups for those over 50 went up from $7,500 to $8,000, while catch-ups for those ages 60-63 stayed the same at $11,250. However (new for this year), catch-ups for those with previous year’s Social Security wages of at least $150,000 must be made as Roth contributions.
An article recently published in the Lexis Practice Advisor, Substantial Risk of Forfeiture Under the IRC, discusses the concept of substantial risk of forfeiture (SRF) under sections 83, 409A, 457(f), 457A, and 3121(v)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code and the different consequences of the failure to achieve a SRF under each such section.
Topics covered are:
Significance of SRF under the Various I.R.C. Sections
Definition of SRF
Conditions that Generally Support the Existence of a SRF and Related Requirements
Conditions that Generally Do Not Support the Existence of a SRF
On August 25, 2023, the IRS issued Notice 2023-62, dealing with the SECURE 2.0 requirement that any age 50 catch-up contributions by an employee with prior-year FICA wages over $145,000 (to be indexed with inflation) be made on a Roth basis, rather than a pre-tax basis. The guidance had two effects:
The requirement that catch-up contributions for individuals over age 50 with prior-year FICA wages over $145,000 be made in the form of Roth contributions was delayed until 2026.
The language of the statute had suggested that no catch-up contributions could be made at all beginning in 2024. The IRS has confirmed that it will continue to treat catch-up contributions as permissible.
While the guidance applies to 401(k) plans, most governmental entities are not permitted to have 401(k) plans. However, it also affects governmental 457(b) plans, along with 403(b) plans for those governmental entities that are permitted to have 403(b) plans (governmental instrumentalities that also have tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3), and public schools and universities). It is particularly significant for governmental entities which maintain both 403(b) and 457(b) plans, since an employee is able to double the usual amount of catch-ups by making a catch-up election with respect to both plans.
The IRS also announced its intention to issue further guidance in three areas:
In determining whether an individual has $145,000 in FICA wages, wages exempt from FICA will not be counted. Among other things, this would mean that state and local government entities not subject to Social Security would not have to comply with the new rules at all.
For a participant in a multiple employer plan with compensation from two or more participating employers, the determination of whether the Roth catch-up rule applies would be made on an employer-by-employer basis. So for example, in a statewide plan, compensation that an individual received from one governmental employer would not have to be combined with that from another in applying the $145,000 limit.
When the new rules become effective in 2026, a plan may treat a pre-tax catch-up election for a participant subject to the Roth catch-up rule as though it were a Roth catch-up election, without the need to obtain an updated election from the participant. For example, suppose that a participant over age 50 with compensation of $145,000 elects to make a contribution of 25% of compensation. The maximum for 2023 (without catch-ups) would be $22,500. Assuming this limit were still in effect in 2026 (it rises with inflation), the employer would not need to get a separate election in order to have an additional $7,500 taken from the participant’s compensation and contributed on a Roth basis.
While these three points would be helpful to impacted plan sponsors, they are not yet the IRS’s formal position.
Carol V. Calhoun has written a Benefits Guide entitled “Government and Tax-Exempt Organizations” for Bloomberg Law. The Bloomberg Law Benefits Guide is intended to be a resource for non-benefits practitioners that is easy to understand and explains complex topics in a straightforward way. Ms. Calhoun’s guide covers the types of plans maintained by governmental and tax-exempt organizations, determination of whether a plan is governmental, legal requirements and restrictions, and correction methods in case of errors in administration. The Benefits Guide is available to Bloomberg subscribers, or a copy of Ms. Calhoun’s chapter is below.
Sections 403(b) and 457(b) plan compliance presents significant challenges for employee benefits counsel and plan administrators. Sponsors of 403(b) and 457(b) plans must consider the impact of recent regulatory and litigation developments to ensure strict compliance to avoid potential claims.
As part of a Strafford webinar on “403(b) and 457(b) Plan Compliance Challenges,” Carol V. Calhoun gave a presentation on ways in which new developments create challenges for tax-exempt and governmental organizations which sponsor such plans. A copy of the PowerPoint for her speech can be found at this link.
A recent Strafford CLE webinar guided employee benefits counsel on key compliance challenges in the design and administration of 403(b) and 457(b) plans and methods to overcome them. A panel discussed complex rules and pitfalls to avoid in plan design, key administrative challenges, the universal availability rule, excess contributions, hardship distributions, and methods to limit claims.
The PowerPoint slides for the portion of the presentation given by Carol V. Calhoun are below.
Reload document 
Open in new tab