top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How the New Bankruptcy Law Affects Your IRA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    How the New Bankruptcy Law Affects Your IRA

    How the New Bankruptcy Law Affects Your IRA

    Our personal finance expert explains how the new law increases your IRA's protection from the IRS (maybe they meant Creditors).

    (umm, i dont see why they said IRS. maybe i missed something in the article )

    August 15, 2005
    By Debra Neiman, CFP

    On April 20, 2005, President Bush signed into law the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA). The new law, which goes into effect on October 17, 2005, generally makes it tougher for people to protect their assets in the event of personal bankruptcy. But there's one notable exception: IRAs, fast becoming the biggest asset people have, actually receive more protection under the new law.

    Under the new law, up to $1 million of the assets you hold in traditional IRAs and Roth IRAs, or a larger amount determined by the bankruptcy court, will be exempt from your bankruptcy estate.

    What's more, IRA assets that came from an employer retirement plan rollover--such as a 401(k), 403(b) or profit-sharing plan--won't be subject to the claims of your creditors, regardless of the state in which you reside or the value of your rollover assets and their subsequent growth.

    The new law also reinforces the unlimited protection that currently exists for 401(k) plans, 457 plans, 403(b) plans, governmental plans and tax-exempt organization retirement plans, and adds to the list of exemptions from the bankruptcy estate plans for the small business and/or self-employed person, including SEP-IRAs, SIMPLE IRAs, Keogh plans and solo 401(k) plans. (Given unlimited bankruptcy creditor protection, such retirement accounts are likely to become even more attractive retirement-savings vehicles in years to come.)

    In addition, retirement funds in transit from one IRA or retirement account to another are also protected under the new bankruptcy law. The law even provides protection if you withdraw funds from an IRA and roll them back over within 60 days into an IRA or other retirement account.

    But you should know that not all facets of IRAs are protected. For instance, distributions from retirement plans--required minimum distributions and hardship distributions--aren't protected under BAPCPA. So once you've withdrawn money from a plan, it's no longer protected.

    Furthermore, the new law provides greater creditor protection for IRA assets, but only in bankruptcy. So they don't apply to judgments awarded in other courts where state creditor protection laws will apply. And BAPCPA won't stop a divorcing spouse from being able to take a share of the other spouse's pension.

    So what are the implications of the new law? First, the new law creates clarity where there had been confusion stemming from a lack of conformity among the states. Prior to BAPCPA, it was difficult to determine how a person's IRA would be exempt from the claims of his or her creditors if they filed for personal bankruptcy. Now that's no longer the case.

    Under the new law, investors have the incentive to keep IRAs that are funded with rollover salary-deferral contributions separate from IRAs funded with annual contributions. To co-mingle rollover and contributory IRA assets would make it difficult to identify which portion of the IRA represented assets that are "unlimited protection" rollovers (plus earnings) and which portion represented IRA contributions and earnings (subject to the $1 million limitation).

    The new law also encourages investors to roll over their 401(k) to an IRA after they're no longer employed. Prior to BAPCPA, investors often left their funds in their former employer's 401(k) plan since such plans were fully protected from bankruptcy. Now that 401(k) plans and IRAs have near equal protection from creditor claims, there's less reason to leave such funds behind.

    On the other hand, one good reason to leave assets in a 401(k) or other former employer plan is that qualified retirement plans are protected under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), which extends to judgments other than bankruptcy, regardless of your state law.

    Like all new laws, BAPCPA will likely be challenged by creditors at some point in the courts. So before making any changes to your IRA's current status, I'd suggest you seek the advice of your certified financial planner and a bankruptcy attorney who can advise you as to your best options.


    Im not an attorney or a trustee. You cant trust me either though!

    [x] - Done with 341? Join the 60 Day Club! ___________[x] - Im Discharged! Whoo Hooo!
    [x] - Poll: Should I File Pro-Se ____________________[x] - New BK Law: Median Income, Means Testing and Presumptive Abuse
    [x] - Zombie Debt Collectors Dig Up Your Old Mistakes _-[x] - Bankruptcy Law Resource
    [x] - Need A Fast Answer? Available 24/7!--__________[x] - Dont Be A Hero On Your Budget - You Wont Get An Award!

    #2
    Originally posted by bkfiler
    How the New Bankruptcy Law Affects Your IRA

    Our personal finance expert explains how the new law increases your IRA's protection from the IRS (maybe they meant Creditors).

    (umm, i dont see why they said IRS. maybe i missed something in the article )
    I have a thought on that issue. Why the article said IRS.

    First question attnys ask is if we have children under 18. When we tell them about son, they have no problem adding him as he's in college. The attnys aren't sure whether or not we can include Mom as a dependent in figuring income/expenses. Mainly, for the Means Test, is what I'm thinking. One attny said flat out we cannot include her. 2 said if you can claim her on your taxes, which we do, you should be able to claim her in BK. But both qualified with they would have to check to be sure. Soooooo, I've been doing some research.

    Last night, I actually read thru the new BK law. Of couse there's no mention as to the definition of dependents. There are constant references to the IRS thru out the new law. Since the actual law refers back to the IRS, CONSTANTLY, I read the IRS description for dependents. Mom qualifies, which we already knew she did. Social Security income does not count. It has to be EARNED income over $3400/year. Anyway, I digress......

    I'm thinking the title of this article is basically because the IRS rules are the foundation for many of the BK rules. The BK rules are supplemental, yet not conflicting with the IRS rules in many areas. Retirements/401K's/IRA's being one of those areas. Since we don't have any of the above any more, I didn't really pay close attn to those parts.

    The Means Test is based on info from the Census Bureau. So I went to the Census Bureau website to see what their definition of family is. According to the Census Bureau, a family/household is a group of people, related by blood or marriage, occupying the same domicile. It went on to explain that often times unrelated people occupy the same domicile. In those instances, the Census Bureau views those groups of people as muliple families/households residing at the same domicile.

    I think I found my own definition/basis for whether or not we can claim Mom.
    Filed Ch 7 - 09/06
    Discharged - 12/2006
    Officially Declared No Asset - 03/2007
    Closed - 04/2007

    I am not an attorney. My comments are based on personal experience and research. Always consult an attorney in your area to address concerns related to your particular situation.

    Another good thing about being poor is that when you are seventy your children will not have declared you legally insane in order to gain control of your estate. - Woody Allen...

    Comment

    bottom Ad Widget

    Collapse
    Working...
    X