Hacker News Reader

Comment by Racing0461 | Hacker News Reader

That's not allowed by my plan/benefit manager due to reasons. I assume due to the eQUiTY based reasons for 401k clawbacks etc if not enough employees do it. I can only do max 15%.

even more reason for a solo 401k for everyone. Why should it matter for my 401k if kiki in hr doesn't contribute so mine needs to be clawed back?

> You mean allocating your "what % of my paycheck (gross or net) goes into it" to 100% for the first few paychecks to get it to $19.5k?

Also why does it need to be taken out of each paycheck. I can just fund it from cash Jan 1st each year.

At the end of the day, if the tax incentive is being used to get people to save, just let people save and claim the incentive. No need for a middleman (the employer).

View on HN

Do 401(k)s have clawbacks? I had never heard of that before and googling around all I found was articles about the complexity of clawing back things like sign on bonuses if the employee had immediate access to the 401(k) plan and had deferred part of the sign on. It also wasn’t “impossible” to get the sign on back, just complex.

I also have never seen a company allowing day 1 401(k) access but maybe I’ve always worked at a shittier tier of companies

> 401(k) clawbacks, also known as a corrective distribution, occur when a company's 401(k) plan fails to meet certain regulatory requirements, such as nondiscrimination testing. These tests are designed to ensure that a 401(k) plan does not disproportionately benefit highly compensated employees (HCEs) over non-highly compensated employees (NHCEs).

Hense my use of the word "equity"

If the E in those acronyms meant “equity” then my bad for not knowing. I am not working in such hallowed halls that equity is handed out without having to go through three or four layers of making sure your betters get paid out before you get the chance to see a benefit.

Pretend you’re explaining like I’m five when it comes to the word “equity” mostly because I don’t see where you used it in your post that be quoted as “equity”

Well there are personal iras but they have much lower limits for equity reasons like you thought: https://www.morningstar.com/retirement/why-are-ira-limits-so...

Yeah i do the backdoor roth too.

Any limitations on the %age of your paycheck to 401k is your employer. I’ve set my 401k contribution to 80% in the past.

Not calling you a lair, but that’s been all allowed at all of my past employers that I can remember. Sounds like an employer issue.

Its at quite a few companies, even the largest ones. I know Microsoft and Amazon has/had it. Microsoft limits you such that no more than, I believe, 40 - 60% of your paycheck can be redistributed to retirement accounts.

I believe Amazon does too, since they run into HCI/HCE issues all the time, famously having a low match.

Among a plethora of others. For me, this has been quite a few companies, not all of course, I don't backload mostly out of laziness using this strategy often, but its beneficial when jumping to companies with low matches partway through the year.

I think I have experienced this at past companies, including Amazon.

But the limit was very high. I recall setting the contribution to something like 80% or 90% and maxing out after a few paychecks.

But in general: I agree with you. Why should we only be allowed to do what my employer allows? As if them allowing me to contribute is some benefit they are bestowing upon me. Rather than them just being middle-men between me and tax law.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com