|
|
Post by retread on Jun 15, 2009 9:31:21 GMT -5
Okay, here's a good one for all you budding tax lawyers out there. When I left state employment earlier this year, I maxed out my contributions to my 457 and 401(k) plans to the tune of about $50K. Can I still participate in the TSP plan, or is there some overall limit to the amount of money you can contribute to these types of plans? Also, am I reading the TSP stuff correctly that the employer contributions do not kick in for new employees until June 2010?
|
|
|
|
Post by benchsitter on Jun 15, 2009 12:04:03 GMT -5
retread: I don't know the answer to your question (got a "B-" in tax 30 yrs ago), but here is a website to some new 2009 information that also includes a link at the bottom for further information. Hope it is helpful. www.dfas.mil/mil-news/december2008/tsp.html. |
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on Jun 15, 2009 16:55:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ruonthelist on Jun 16, 2009 6:21:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by northwest on Jun 16, 2009 6:57:03 GMT -5
Okay, here's a good one for all you budding tax lawyers out there. When I left state employment earlier this year, I maxed out my contributions to my 457 and 401(k) plans to the tune of about $50K. Can I still participate in the TSP plan, or is there some overall limit to the amount of money you can contribute to these types of plans? Also, am I reading the TSP stuff correctly that the employer contributions do not kick in for new employees until June 2010? I had a similar question. Basically, in 2009, could I could I put the TSP limit... $16,500... into the TSP? Or did I need to prorate it, given the fact that I was working for the feds only 1/2 a year? I was given the following name & number: Gwen Parker, (410)965-1004. Very helpful and knowledgeable re TSP and retirement issues. She told me that I could contribute the entire $16,500 in 2009. I just divided $16,500 by the remaining # of pay periods. Of course, if you do this, make sure that you lower the payments in 2010, so you won't get to the contribution limit too fast in 2010. If you do so, you'll lose the benefit of the employer matching. If you have any further Qs, I suggest you talk to Ms. Parker. |
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on Jun 16, 2009 10:04:24 GMT -5
Thanks NW - you must have read my mind!
|
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on Jun 16, 2009 11:43:04 GMT -5
Employees under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) are subject to the government pension offset. Those employees under the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) are not subject to a government pension offset--as of this writing.
Regardless of which party is running the government, federal employees are always in the front row of those who shoulder the burden when it comes to adverse pay or benefit actions.
With the Trust Fund going into the tank in just a few years, I would not be surprised to see an offset fo SS retirement benefits for individuals who receive TSP moneys, federal retirement, or both. Outside of the capital metroplex, there are not enough federal employees in any one location to sway an election of a Senator or Representative.
While I have always participated in the TSP, I also sock away as much as I can in my USAA portfolio.
The real trick, however, is to stay alive long enough to reap the benefits...
|
|
|
|
Post by semipa on Jun 16, 2009 18:25:14 GMT -5
On the good news front from an article in today's Federal Times: By August, newly hired employees who enroll in the Thrift Savings Plan will immediately be eligible for matching contributions from their agencies, the board governing TSP said Tuesday.
Federal employees now can enroll and invest their own money in TSP on their first day on the job, but they cannot receive matching funds and an additional automatic 1 percent contribution from their agencies until they’ve been employed for six months to one year. Military service members do not receive matching contributions, so this provision will not benefit them.
The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board said immediate contributions will be the first major change to TSP following Congress’ passage of the tobacco bill last week, which contained four other changes to TSP. President Barack Obama is expected to sign the bill this week.
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Jul 22, 2009 19:10:14 GMT -5
On the good news front from an article in today's Federal Times: By August, newly hired employees who enroll in the Thrift Savings Plan will immediately be eligible for matching contributions from their agencies, the board governing TSP said Tuesday. Federal employees now can enroll and invest their own money in TSP on their first day on the job, but they cannot receive matching funds and an additional automatic 1 percent contribution from their agencies until they’ve been employed for six months to one year. Military service members do not receive matching contributions, so this provision will not benefit them. The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board said immediate contributions will be the first major change to TSP following Congress’ passage of the tobacco bill last week, which contained four other changes to TSP. President Barack Obama is expected to sign the bill this week. So, if I may ask, what's the latest on this? Given that a lot of folks have either just reported or are about to report (yours truly included--why am on this Board and not packing, my wife asks), is the TSP website up to date? I want to to do the catch-up 5.5K extra contribution given my "elder" status... |
|
|
|
Post by decadealj on Jul 23, 2009 6:47:26 GMT -5
M- although I share your cynicism about our government and set-offs, I can't believe Congress would ever permit a SS set-off to TSP. Combining TSP and SS with the reduced retirement benefit to 1% from 2%, was the whole justification for changing CSRS to FERS. But then again, in todays economy, who knows where the next offset is coming.
|
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on Jul 23, 2009 8:51:07 GMT -5
State employees in several States, as well as a lot of private sector employees, are calling for "fat-cat" federal employees to "share the pain" of the recession by taking pay cuts and unpaid furlough days. A talking head on TV has said, "...it is unfair for federal employees to be immune from the effects of the economic down-turn..."
Don't think it could happen? It happened before, during the Depression. Remember that Congress plays to the audience and there are not enough federal employees in any congressional district to make or break a Congressman.
It may be closer than you think...
|
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Jul 23, 2009 10:17:28 GMT -5
State employees in several States, as well as a lot of private sector employees, are calling for "fat-cat" federal employees to "share the pain" of the recession by taking pay cuts and unpaid furlough days. A talking head on TV has said, "...it is unfair for federal employees to be immune from the effects of the economic down-turn..." Don't think it could happen? It happened before, during the Depression. Remember that Congress plays to the audience and there are not enough federal employees in any congressional district to make or break a Congressman. It may be closer than you think... The state employees can scream all they want, but as soon as it is suggested that everyone's access to social security benefits, for example, could be affected by employee cutbacks, that won't fly. I can hear the AARP going ballistic now. Also, HR expenses are a much larger piece of the state budgets than they are for the federal budgets. Whereas the feds switched out of the more expensive civil service program, many of the states continue to use a similar, expensive, outdated system which is breaking their budgets. I think the only thing federal employees are vulnerable on is the annual pay raise. |
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on Jul 23, 2009 10:54:50 GMT -5
In the early 1930's the federal government "furloughed" federal employees by taking annual salaries, dividing by 12, then multiplying by 10, then dividing by 12 again to get new monthly salaries. Everyone was expected to work full-time; there was no loss of access. They will do it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Jul 23, 2009 11:07:29 GMT -5
In the early 1930's the federal government "furloughed" federal employees by taking annual salaries, dividing by 12, then multiplying by 10, then dividing by 12 again to get new monthly salaries. Everyone was expected to work full-time; there was no loss of access. They will do it again. Val is right. SSA is bulletproof. |
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Jul 23, 2009 11:54:42 GMT -5
In the early 1930's the federal government "furloughed" federal employees by taking annual salaries, dividing by 12, then multiplying by 10, then dividing by 12 again to get new monthly salaries. Everyone was expected to work full-time; there was no loss of access. They will do it again. Remember, federal employees didn't represent nearly as large of a constituency in the early 30's as they do now, nor did they have as aggressive union representation. Even though the early 30's didn't see a slow down in services, when has reality ever mattered in political decision-making? Its so much easier to use the media in a scare campaign in 2009 than it ever was in the 1930s. Really, how much did people rely on federal government services until the New Deal hit its stride? |
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on Jul 23, 2009 12:27:13 GMT -5
Active duty military personnel were included in the 1930's furloughs. They will not be included this time.
When I read about "aggressive union representation" I almost shot diet coke out through my nose. I used to belong to a real union; what I see from AFGE is laughable.
|
|
|
|
Post by valkyrie on Jul 23, 2009 14:50:18 GMT -5
Active duty military personnel were included in the 1930's furloughs. They will not be included this time. When I read about "aggressive union representation" I almost shot diet coke out through my nose. I used to belong to a real union; what I see from AFGE is laughable. All I said was "aggressive." Please remember that I never said "competent," "intelligent," "focused," or "serious." And I find Coke Zero to be a much less irritating nasal wash than Diet Coke. |
|
|
|
Post by morgullord on Jul 23, 2009 15:54:23 GMT -5
...must...find...cotton...for...ears....
|
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on Jul 23, 2009 18:16:22 GMT -5
I got confirmation that the SSA matched my voluntary TSP contribution on this pay period (the 2nd one after being hired) - so the legislation is in effect!
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Jul 23, 2009 20:12:17 GMT -5
I got confirmation that the SSA matched my voluntary TSP contribution on this pay period (the 2nd one after being hired) - so the legislation is in effect! Nice to be back on thread. Thx lb! And may I say yabba-dabba-do! ;D |
|
