facebook twitter instagram linkedin google youtube vimeo tumblr yelp rss email podcast phone blog search brokercheck brokercheck Play Pause
Where Does It Say That? - The Problem with Legalese Thumbnail

Where Does It Say That? - The Problem with Legalese

My biggest gripe with legislation is the same complaint held by most – the bulk of it is written in legalese – i.e., difficult-to-understand language. I am no idiot, but sometimes I sure feel dumb when I read things like the SECURE Act. My eyes glaze over and I ask myself, “What the heck did I just read?” While I proudly carry the CFP® designation and have over 25 years of experience in the financial services industry, I have no formal legal training. Thankfully, I work with a couple of experienced attorneys who can recuse me if I flounder.

Legalese is the standard language of legal documents, and without the proper education on this language, it's easy to feel like a fish out of water. Educating yourself on these topics will improve your knowledge of this language and leave you feeling more confident.

I understand that financial advisors are on the front lines, speaking directly with clients. I also understand that advisors must earn and retain their client’s confidence. A string of poor guidance or incorrect answers can end a relationship quickly. We are all trying to make sense of the newest IRA rules. So, as advisor questions come in about the SECURE Act, SECURE 2.0 and the tax code, I get it when they ask, “Where does it say that?” Advisors want to present concrete evidence as to why a decision is being made or what rules apply in tricky situations.

But the “Where does it say that?” question is not an easy one. Here is a prime example…

If a person makes an excess contribution to their IRA, it must be corrected. (Examples of excess IRA contributions include contributions that exceed the maximum annual contribution dollar limit for the year, and rolling over an amount that isn’t eligible for rollover – like a required minimum distribution.) However, an excess contribution may not be fixed by simply removing the amount of the excess. The excess, plus or minus the earnings (what the IRS calls the “net income attributable,” or “NIA”) must be removed by October 15th of the year after the year for which the contribution was made. If the excess is not timely corrected by the October 15 deadline, then the 6% penalty applies each year the amount remains in the account as of December 31. After the October 15 deadline, only the excess amount needs to be withdrawn.

Prior to SECURE 2.0, if a person under age 59 ½ made an excess contribution fix before the October deadline, the earnings (the NIA) was taxable AND subject to a 10% penalty. This 10% penalty on the NIA was eliminated by SECURE 2.0. But where does it say that in the law?


(a) IN GENERAL. — Subparagraph (A) of section 72(t)(2) is amended –

     (1) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of clause (vii);

     (2) by striking the period at the end of clause (viii) and inserting ‘‘, or’’; and

     (3) by inserting after clause (viii) the following new clause:

          ‘‘(ix) attributable to withdrawal of net income attributable to a contribution which is distributed pursuant to section    408(d)(4).’’

Minus the effective date clause, this is the entire section - hidden within the 340+ pages of SECURE 2.0 - eliminating the 10% penalty on NIA. Clear as mud? You can read it again – but it probably won’t help. Only by overlaying Section 333 from SECURE 2.0 onto the tax code can one deduce what is happening. So, if you ask me, “Where does it say that?” – I have a hunch what tangled mess lies ahead. Please forgive me if I hesitate and squirm and hem and haw.

By Andy Ives, CFP®, AIF®
IRA Analyst
Ed Slott and Company, LLC

To read more of our blog articles, click here.

Christian Cordoba, founder of California Retirement Advisors, has been a member of Ed Slott's Master Elite IRA Advisor Group since 2007.

Copyright © 2023, Ed Slott and Company, LLC Reprinted from The Slott Report, 10/09/23, with permission. https://www.irahelp.com/slottreport/%E2%80%9Cwhere-does-it-say-that%E2%80%9D-%E2%80%93-problem-legalese, Ed Slott and Company, LLC takes no responsibility for the current accuracy of this article. 
Investment advisory services offered through Mutual Advisors, LLC DBA California Retirement Advisors, a SEC registered investment adviser. Securities offered through Mutual Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC. Mutual Securities, Inc. and Mutual Advisors, LLC are affiliated companies. CA Insurance license #0B09076. This content is developed from sources believed to be providing accurate information and provided by California Retirement Advisors. It may not be used for the purpose of avoiding any federal tax penalties. Please consult legal or tax professionals for specific information regarding your individual situation. The opinions expressed and material provided are for general information and should not be considered a solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. California Retirement Advisors, nor any of its members, are tax accountants or legal attorneys and do not provide tax or legal advice. For tax or legal advice, you should consult your tax or legal professional.