2020 IRS Benefits & Contributions Limits Announced
(Posted on November 18, 2019 by Carol V. Calhoun)

On November 6, 2019, the IRS issued IRS Notice 2019-59, announcing the changes in pensions and benefits limits for 2020. The maximum limits on employee pretax contributions to 401(k), 403(b), and 457(b) plans (without catch-ups) increased from $19,000 to $19,500, the maximum limit on annual additions (primarily to defined contribution plans) rose from $56,000 to $57,000, and the maximum limit on benefits (when expressed as an annual benefit) under a defined benefit plan rose from $225,000 to $230,000. A variety of other limits, including the limits on annual compensation taken into account and the compensation used in the definition of a key employee, also increased.

A chart showing details, and limits from 1996 to 2020, can be found at this link.

Maximum Benefits and Contributions Limits
(Posted on November 18, 2019 by Carol V. Calhoun)

IRS Issues Self-Assessment Forms for Federal, State, and Local Government Employers
(Posted on July 10, 2017 by Carol V. Calhoun)

The IRS has now issued a series of forms to enable federal, state, and local governments to assess their compliance with federal tax statutes, and has set forth some common errors found in examining such employers. Several of the forms relate to employee benefits issues, and may be of assistance to governments trying to ensure that they comply with all legal requirements.

The forms are as follows:

For use by Federal, State and Local Government Entities

For use by State and Local Government Entities Only

Webinar – Phased Retirement Programs: Exploring the Issues
(Posted on December 5, 2016 by Carol V. Calhoun)

Phased retirement has become increasingly popular among two groups of employees: those who would like to begin easing away from work at a younger age, and those who need to continue working at older ages but require a less demanding schedule. We recently conducted a webinar to help employers identify the situations in which phased retirement may be beneficial, and structure phased retirement arrangements in such a way as to avoid the practical and legal pitfalls.

The PowerPoint presentation for the webinar is now available at this link.

Checklist of Federal Tax Law Rules Applicable to Public Retirement Systems
(Posted on October 8, 2016 by Carol V. Calhoun)

Note: This outline is a basic summary of the principal Internal Revenue Code qualification requirements that apply to governmental plans, other than plans described in Code section 403(b) or 457(b). It also includes selected Code requirements that do not relate to qualification. It is very general in nature, and does not replace research on specific questions. Read more.

Employee Benefits Effects of Treasury, IRS and Department of Labor Announcements That All Legal Same-Sex Marriages Will Be Recognized For Federal Tax Purposes
(Posted on February 23, 2015 by Carol V. Calhoun)

This post was updated on June 26, 2015 to reflect the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which struck down all state bans on same-sex marriage.

The Treasury Department and the IRS announced on August 29, 2013 that all legal same-sex marriages will be recognized for federal tax purposes. On September 18, 2013, the Department of Labor took the same position for purposes of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA“). The announcements and corresponding revenue ruling (Rev. Rul. 2013-17) apply only to marriages legal in the jurisdiction in which performed. They do not apply to civil unions or domestic partnerships. (Of course, parties to a civil union or domestic partnership could still obtain the benefits of the announcement and revenue ruling by getting legally married.) The Treasury and IRS position was later reinforced by the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which struck down all state bans on same-sex marriage.

Because employee benefit plans are extensively regulated by federal law, this announcement means that all employers will be required to recognize such marriages for many employee benefits purposes. Conversely, employers in states that treat civil unions or domestic partnerships as if they were marriages will nevertheless be forbidden from treating such arrangements as marriages for certain employee benefits purposes. However, the precise impact will depend on whether the plan is subject to ERISA or whether it is a governmental or church plan exempt from ERISA. The chart below sets forth areas in which the announcement will affect the operation of different types of plans.

Judge in Detroit Bankruptcy Case Denies Any Special Protections for Pensions
(Posted on December 5, 2013 by Carol V. Calhoun)

Judge Steven W. Rhodes of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan had now issued an opinion stating that the bankruptcy proceedings for the City of Detroit can go forward. The opinion provided no special protections for as yet unfunded pension benefits (although benefits already in the pension funds were protected). The judge rejected a contention that Michigan constitutional provisions prohibiting impairment of pensions would provide protection to promised but unfunded benefits.