Skip to main content
Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackFinance/status/267114122552954881
edited tags
Link
Chris W. Rea
  • 31.8k
  • 17
  • 103
  • 190
Source Link
Shawaron
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 35
  • 33

Non-qualified Savings Plan vs. 401(k) for Highly Compensated Employee

Late last year, I started a higher-paying job than I've ever had. Today I got a letter from my employer's benefits department and Fidelity telling me that I'm expected to pass $115,000 in compensation this year, making me a "Highly Compensated Employee". Yay!

Unfortunately, as an HCE, I'm apparently not allowed to put more than 3% of my income into the company 401(k). Instead, I'm being offered a Non Qualified Savings Plan.

As far as I can tell, the differences between this and a 401(k) are:

  1. I am allowed to put up to $50,000 into it vs. 3% of my wage (around $3500) for a 401(k)
  2. I must choose, right now, how I want my distribution, and my choices seem to be "lump sum", "over five years", or "over ten years".
  3. The distribution in (2) starts when I leave the company, and cannot be rolled into an IRA or 401(k) and thus is taxable that year.
  4. There is no 10% penalty if (2) happens before I am 59.5 years old
  5. A NQSP is just another liability of the company and is not segregated the way that a 401(k) is; if the company goes bankrupt, I'm just another creditor.

Is there anything I'm missing? Are there any other advantages or disadvantages I should know about?

Also, in (5), is it considered unpaid wages? Because that's pretty high on the bankruptcy hierarchy.

If I stay at this job through the end of 2013 (it's an hourly contract position and not particularly stable), my income will be around $120k - $125k for 2013; Would it be worth it to take a few extra weeks off over the year and keep myself below $115k?