SECURE Act: How Could This New Law Impact Retirement Planning for Lawyers?
Retirement is often on the mind of many attorneys, whether it is advising clients on their estate planning, planning for their own retirement, or setting up plans for their firm's employees.
February 25, 2020 at 09:55 AM
4 minute read
Retirement is often on the mind of many attorneys, whether it is advising clients on their estate planning, planning for their own retirement, or setting up plans for their firm's employees. On Jan. 1, the recently passed SECURE Act (Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement) took effect impacting the ways attorneys and others can prepare their finances for retiring. Here's how the rules could impact you and your firm's retirement plan.
|Contributions and Distributions
Two of the most important changes create the potential to build more savings in a traditional IRA and let you keep your money longer in a tax-advantaged account:
- The SECURE Act eliminates the age limit on making contributions to a traditional IRA. Previously, contributions could not be made after age 70½. Effective this year, there is no age limit on contributions to a traditional IRA.
- The age at which you are first required to take minimum distributions from a traditional IRA or workplace savings plan has been raised from 70½ to 72. This could help your retirement funds last longer and generate tax savings. The rule applies to those reaching age 70½ in 2020 or later. If you reached that milestone in 2019, you are still bound to begin required minimum distributions after reaching 70½ .
Enhancements for Workplace Plans
The SECURE Act includes enhancements to 401(k) plans:
- Employers receive greater tax incentives to automatically enroll employees into their retirement plan. Automatic enrollment tends to encourage participation in a plan.
- Annuity options can now be offered in more workplace retirement plans. Annuities offer a way to turn retirement savings into a stream of steady income that can continue throughout your life. That tends to replicate the effect of traditional employer pension plans, which are available to fewer workers today.
- Workplace retirement plans are now more accessible to part-time workers. Employers are required to offer participation to those who work either 1,000 hours throughout the year or have three consecutive years with 500 hours of service (employees must be age 21 or older to be eligible).
More Flexibility for Withdrawals
There are new provisions that allow penalty-free withdrawals from a traditional IRA or workplace savings plan of up to $5,000 per parent following the birth or adoption of a child. While such an early withdrawal avoids the 10% penalty, taxes will still be due on the distribution. It may be best to keep this money targeted specifically to meet your retirement income needs, but the new law gives you more flexibility.
|Elimination of 'Stretch' IRAs
Previously, if you inherited an IRA or 401(k), you could "stretch" your distributions and tax payments out over your single life expectancy. Many people have used "stretch" IRAs and 401(k)s as reliable income sources. Now, for IRAs inherited from original owners who have passed away on or after Jan. 1, 2020, the new law requires many beneficiaries to withdraw assets from an inherited IRA or 401(k) plan within 10 years following the death of the account holder. Spouse beneficiaries, nonspouse beneficiaries who are no more than 10 years younger than the IRA owner and nonspouse beneficiaries who are disabled or chronically ill will continue to be able to stretch their IRAs over their lifetime.
|Consult With a Professional
What do these changes mean for you? Be sure to consult with your financial adviser and tax professional to determine how to best adjust your retirement income plans accordingly.
Sandy Jukel is a financial adviser and managing director with Ameriprise Financial Services in Coral Gables, Florida. He focuses on fee-based financial planning and asset management strategies and has been in practice for 36 years. Contact him at 786-598-4477 or at One Alhambra Plaza, Penthouse, Coral Gables, FL 33134. Visit www.ameripriseadvisors.com/sandy.jukel.
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllInitial Steps to Set Up a Fla. Appeal: Your Future Self (or Appellate Attorney) Will Thank You
6 minute readDivorce Timing Is Everything: Waiting for the New Year May Have Its Advantages
4 minute readMotions for Summary Judgment and Discovery: The 2021 Rule Changes Continue to Emerge
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Stevens & Lee Names New Delaware Shareholder
- 2U.S. Supreme Court Denies Trump Effort to Halt Sentencing
- 3From CLO to President: Kevin Boon Takes the Helm at Mysten Labs
- 4How Law Schools Fared on California's July 2024 Bar Exam
- 5'Discordant Dots': Why Phila. Zantac Judge Rejected Bid for His Recusal
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250