If Check goes straight to tuition

Hashem_Yaazor

Tue, Aug 29 2017, 9:13 pm

Ok, maybe you are right...I'm too tired to think straight right now. And as this is a public forum, do you mind deleting my quotes in case they are wrong? I'm deleting on my end before anyone takes my posts at face value prior to me checking with my in-home legal ad visor (not sure why I entered this conversation, I don't do my taxes and I've never taken QTR!)

shyshira

Tue, Aug 29 2017, 9:14 pm

Squishy wrote:

So now you are agreeing with me?

I never disagreed with you on that point.

I disagree with you that everyone needs to offered the benefit for it to be valid.

33055

Tue, Aug 29 2017, 9:19 pm

shyshira wrote:

I never disagreed with you on that point.

I disagree with you that everyone needs to offered the benefit for it to be valid.

Everyone in the same class must be offered the benefit.

You can't say to your social studies teacher, I will give you a $5000 tuition reduction benefit but not offer it to your math teacher. You can't give your night janitor a benefit without offering it to your day janitor.

However, you can offer it to your highly compensated secular studies principal without offering it to your receptionist.

shyshira

Tue, Aug 29 2017, 9:28 pm

Squishy wrote:

Did you read my last long post? Discriminatory plans favor highly compensated individuals. if its found that some employees are offered a benefit and some are not, and its not tied by back to highly compensated or not highly compensated, the plan is not discriminatory. If the plan is found to be discriminatory, only the highly compensated individuals are denied the 'tax free' benefit.

33055

Tue, Aug 29 2017, 9:32 pm

shyshira wrote:

Did you read my last long post? Discriminatory plans favor highly compensated individuals. its its found that some employees are offered a benefit and some are not, and its not tied by back to highly compensated or not highly compensated, the plan is not discriminatory. If the plan is found to be discriminatory, only the highly compensated individuals are denied the 'tax free' benefit.

I read the law directly. It is more complicated than you are making it. A good argument can be made that a QTR is tied to a principal's job unlike a receptionist's. Uncle Sam would agree with that one.

shyshira

Tue, Aug 29 2017, 9:48 pm

Squishy wrote:

I posted both the law and a relevant IRS Letter Ruling.

There is no requirement for the school to offer the same benefit package to all teachers. The school needs to be careful that if its offered to highly compensated teachers (low threshold) it needs to be offered to all teachers if the benefit is to be non-taxable to the highly compensated teachers.

Its not difficult for a school to find itself in a situation where its providing something to a highly compensated group and not to a less compensated group - so its likely good practice to offer the benefit all around (in the same 'class') - so that those offered the benefit get it tax free - but its certainly not a requirement.

My last comment on this matter.

mommyhood

Wed, Aug 30 2017, 9:46 am

Agudah has a power-point put together by CPA's which clearly states (page 8) that QTR has to be a benefit not a reduction of salary. Pages 9-12 explain the right and wrong way to provide the beneift.

agudathisrael.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Hutman-Agudah-Webinar.pptx