TITLE

MRD Relief -- What It Means and Why Is It Important to Your Retirees Now

PUB. DATE
October 2008
SOURCE
Venulex Legal Summaries;2008 Q4, Special section p1
SOURCE TYPE
Law
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The article offers information on minimum required distributions (MRD) under Section 401(a)(9) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Section 401(a)(9) requires retirees over the age of 70½ to take MRD from their defined contribution retirement plans. Failure to do so will need the withdrawal of a 50 percent excise tax on the amount.
ACCESSION #
36153301

 

Related Articles

  • IRS Issues Guidance Permitting Distributions From IRAs to Health Savings Accounts.  // Legal-Legislative Reporter;Aug2008, Vol. 42 Issue 8, p13 

    The article offers information on Notice 2008-51, issued on June 3, 2008 by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This guidance provides for qualified funding distributions from an individual retirement account (IRA) or a Roth IRA to a health savings account (HSA) under a new Internal Revenue...

  • Employer-owned Life Insurance After the Pension Protection Act of 2006. Behrenfeld, Craig E.; Pless, Erica Good // Florida Bar Journal;Feb2009, Vol. 83 Issue 2, p47 

    The article discusses the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) 101(j) of the code which was added to the IRC by the Pension Protection Act of 2006 to combat perceived abuses of employer-owned life insurance (EOLI) policies in the U.S. It is said that IRC 101(j) will not result in taxation of the excess...

  • BEER AND LOATHING IN THE USA. Brooks, Jary R. // Beer & Brewer;Summer2010, Issue 15, p49 

    The article focuses on the U.S. excise system on beer at the multiple tax levels at state and federal level. Excise taxes are considered part of the American breweries business and become an accepted part of beer costs. It notes the variation of excise tax rates from state to state. Meanwhile,...

  • New Obligation to Self-Report Excise Taxes for Group Health Plan Failures.  // Venulex Legal Summaries;2010 Q1, Special section p1 

    The article focuses on a mandate to self-report excise taxes for group health plan failures under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. It mentions the need for employer-sponsors of group health plans to self-report and pay any excise taxes arising out of their compliance failures as required by the...

  • Part I. Rulings and Decisions Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Dalrymple, John M.; Mazur, Mark J. // Internal Revenue Bulletin;10/19/2015, Vol. 2015 Issue 42, p573 

    The article discusses rulings and decisions under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Topics discussed include equivalency determinations for foreign government and domestic grantees; foundation and similar excise taxes; and the U.S. Internal Revenue Service regulations on the Administrative...

  • Lobbyists called upon to address ruling on Law 154. COSTA, DENNIS // Caribbean Business;2/14/2013, Vol. 41 Issue 5, p6 

    The article offers insights from Advantage Business Consulting Inc. chief economist Juan Lara regarding the need for lobbyists to focus on Law 154 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). He says that instead of pushing for the Internal Revenue Code Section 933-A, lobbyists should demand the...

  • Abbreviations.  // Internal Revenue Bulletin;3/3/2014, Vol. 2014 Issue 10, pi 

    The abbreviations used in the publication "Internal Revenue Bulletin" is presented including ERISA for Employee Retirement Income Security Act, LP for limited partner and TP for taxpayer are presented.

  • IRS Expands Approval for Changes in DB Plan Funding Method. Moore, Rebecca // Plan Advisor News;2015, p125 

    The article discusses the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Announcement 2015-3 which provides for automatic approval of a change in funding method in relation to a single-employer defined benefit plan under certain circumstances where the change in method results from a change in the plan's...

  • ERISA Plans Not Safe from Government-Owed Restitution. Moore, Rebecca // Plan Sponsor News;2015, p32 

    The article discusses the court case USA v. Wilson wherein the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina ruled on whether the plan balance of a retirement plan participant can be garnished for money owed to the government. Topics discussed include the anti-alienation...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics