Leaving 401K $$$ with company post Retirement

[Big_Hitter]

once plan sponsors start putting Retirement Income Solutions (RIS) into their plans, it may nerf the IRA. Here's a really good piece on RIS:

https://dciia.memberclicks.net/asset...ors_121815.pdf

[eta2020]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporateburnout Not true. Some states like mine provide full protection for a rollover IRA as long as you don't co-mingle it with other IRAs.

So basically you are saying it is not same level of protection.

I think inherited IRAs have 0 level of protection in all states. (Unless it is inherited by spouse)

If you build wide moat around your assets creditors will not have desire to test them.
Questionable moats will be tested ... process of which involves expensive lawyers.

[Markola]

Here's one summary of each state's protection of IRAs. I live in Minnesota and its protections are crap, hence we're considering rolling DWs IRA into the TSP. My own 401b is a high fee swamp, so I'll keep my IRA at Vanguard, as maybe I'll have a different employer soon: http://www.thetaxadviser.com/content...teirachart.pdf


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

[youbet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markola Here's one summary of each state's protection of IRAs. I live in Minnesota and its protections are crap, hence we're considering rolling DWs IRA into the TSP. My own 401b is a high fee swamp, so I'll keep my IRA at Vanguard, as maybe I'll have a different employer soon: http://www.thetaxadviser.com/content...teirachart.pdf Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

What does "exempt" mean in the context of this chart. It looks like it means "exempt" from being taken by creditors during bankruptcy. I wonder what it means regarding law suites.

You mention Minnesota's protections are crap. All I see is "yes" and "yes" under TIRA and Roth IRA. Almost all the states show that. What is "crap" about Minnesota's protections?

My state, Illinois, also shows "yes" - "yes." But I'd expect anything involving gov't in Illinois to be crap as demonstrated regularly.

[sengsational]

I've had a four employers, four 401k's, one horror story.

I moved the first employer 401k to the fourth employer 401k recently. Both big companies with very low fees. I'm leaving that 401k open after leaving so I have a guaranteed income fund and age 55 access. The second and the third employer plans were small companies and those 401k's ended up in my single Rollover IRA, along with my traditional IRA funds.

My second employer was the horror story. A small company that was going to be bought-out. I left. The 401k fees weren't horrible, so although I intended to move it, I didn't get around to it right away. The "smart money" got out of the 401k, then they split the fees to liquidate the 401k proportionally across the remaining "dumb money". So if there's any chance a 401k will be liquidated, get the heck out!

[kneehigh]

I almost rolled my 403B CALSTRS to a tIRA but decided not to for the pro-reasons already stated previously. Besides those, I can easily borrow against the 403B up to a certain amount for a fee (processing), of course. The fees are also reasonable for index funds. Vanguard Inst fee is only .04% + .25% (admin fee) for an annualized fee of .29%. What I don't understand is why does CALSTRS charge that much for administrative fees?

[Fedup]

After reading this thread, I'm thinking of leaving my husband's 401k as is. It's very low cost, but it's not as flexible. But after my problem with Vanguard, I think I could trade something good to something horrible. I mean customer service wise.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

[Olbidness]

One thing I hadn't thought of when I rolled my old 401K to an IRA is that most 401K plans allow a rollover from a 401K plan but may not from an IRA. Luckily mine did and so I'll use the rule of 55 to access my 401K penalty free. It didn't hurt that the fees on the same index fund type were cheaper in the new 401K.

[Senator]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbmrtn I left mine in place mostly for the stable value fund. It beats most fixed income alternatives. Also megacorp was a dividend payer and the dividends from company stock can be passed through without any restrictions. The funds are mostly institutional and trust funds ( TRowe and Vanguard ) so the fees aren't bad.

My megacorp stable asset fund has a .43% expense ratio. It has a return of 1.58% YTD. It is mostly AAA corporate bonds.

That return can easily be duplicated with something like IEF or MUB, both of which trade free at Fidelity.

[ls99]

I kept my 403b with Columbia U. Other eployer's where I had 401k were dismal. Got rolled.

[mathjak107]

i would never leave my 401k money with an ex employer .

all it takes is one experience when a company gets taken over because of financial issues or goes out of business to understand the hassles involved in getting your money out .

i still worked at the company when it was taken over and it took me a year and from horror stories i have seen that is good . not only that but the money sits dead in the water in not even an interest bearing account all that time .

don't forget the company is no longer paying the custodian when the plan is terminated .

there is so much red tape involved when a plan is terminated and your money is in it .

[mathjak107]

the issues are that the plan cannot be broken up and distributed out until spousal consent forms are in from everyone who has a spouse or ex spouse .

they all under law have to be notified and sign off on the fact that they are aware proceeds they may be entitled to are going to be distributed .

many ex employees have to be tracked down and located . newspaper postings in the legal sections have to be run for x-amount of months .

it is a long drawn out process and single or not no one can get a penny out .

since that takes months odds are the custodian is no longer getting paid so they have to turn the money over to the state . it takes months until the state finds a new custodian who can take over , make sure all the paper work is in and send out the funds .

no one ever realizes how difficult getting 401k money out of a plan is if the employer terminates it . our company didn't even go bankrupt . they just terminated the 401k . then the company employees and assets were taken over by a new company

[MBSC]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senator My megacorp stable asset fund has a .43% expense ratio. It has a return of 1.58% YTD. It is mostly AAA corporate bonds. That return can easily be duplicated with something like IEF...

Everyone's situation is unique. For me, I do not compare the stable value fund to 7-10 year treasuries (IEF). I compare it to money market funds and high yield savings accounts so 1.58% after expenses is fine for my situation.

[Big_Hitter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mathjak107 the issues are that the plan cannot be broken up and distributed out until spousal consent forms are in from everyone who has a spouse or ex spouse .

uh....401k plans aren't subject to spousal consent for distributions

[Big_Hitter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mathjak107 many ex employees have to be tracked down and located . newspaper postings in the legal sections have to be run for x-amount of months . it is a long drawn out process and single or not no one can get a penny out .

that's true for DB plan terminations, DC plan terminations are much simpler, trivial in fact compared to a DB plan termination

[Big_Hitter]

just saw this on yahoo


"Companies urge retiring workers to leave something behind—their money"


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/compan...125400740.html

[MRG]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big_Hitter just saw this on yahoo "Companies urge retiring workers to leave something behind—their money" http://finance.yahoo.com/news/compan...125400740.html

Wow. Who would pay that?


From the article:
"International Paper tells employees that it is easier and cheaper to keep their money in the company fund. Mr. Hunkeler said workers pay about 0.45% of assets in fees to outside money managers when they remain in the firm’s 401(k) plan; by comparison, he estimated, they would pay fees of more than 1.5% in IRAs. Retention also helps the company keep fees low for all workers."

[Big_Hitter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MRG Wow. Who would pay that?

people who believe in actively managed funds

[MRG]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big_Hitter people who believe in actively managed funds

The ICI says the average cost of an active equity fund was .70 in 2014. I think the article was self serving.

[Big_Hitter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MRG The ICI says the average cost of an active equity fund was .70 in 2014. I think the article was self serving.

well it was from the wsj....plan sponsors will often negotiate a much lower fee schedule for actively managed funds than you or I can get in a retail IRA....not that I would go there