- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
What you have is §409A. §409(a) is a totally different section.
Since the employer has reported the nonqualified deferral as required, all you need to do is to computer the 20% additional tax on the tax due on the amount reported as Code Z.
US employers (and many foreign employers who routinely hire Americans), after many years of struggle with updated guidance, are fully aware of the implications and reporting requirements of §409A, it would be unusual for them to let this slip. What was this arrangement and what actually was the trigger?
Still an AllStar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
I had one where the business was sold. Buyer assumed the deferred comp plan, all disclosed and in good 409A order, and messed it up somewhere along the way. My client, the seller, got an amended W-2 2 years later, as did a number of the other employees who remained with the buyer. That's the only time I've seen it.
Ex-AllStar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Thanks for responding. I know that there is an additional 20% tax on the code z amount. Just wasn’t sure on which schedule I should handle this.
