SECURE 2.0: Emergency Withdrawal for Domestic Violence Victims Provision

Sponsored by Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America

Last week we asked members if they will be adding an optional provision in SECURE 2.0 that allows for a penalty-free emergency distribution, up to $10,000, for domestic violence victims. This provision goes into effect January 1, 2024, and is optional for companies to add or not.  While 16 percent of respondents are adding this provision, forty percent are still considering it as they are currently focused on the mandatory provisions in SECURE 2.0 and will consider this next year. A third of respondents are not adding this provision as many state that they either don’t allow hardship withdrawals at all, or they feel employees have adequate avenues to access their money if needed. See additional comments below.

Adding:

• I have had employees that would have benefited from this if it were an option in the past.
• Monies that are tied to spousal consent can be problematic, with this new provision given why a participant is requesting the distribution but overall feel this is an appropriate option to add.
• Since 2005, we have been committed to disrupting the cycle of relationship abuse. Adopting this provision will strengthen our commitment to this important cause.
• This aligns with our values and being there to provide support to our employees where they are at.
• We already allow for hardship withdrawals.  It wouldn't make since for us to deny this hardship.

Considering:

• Concerned about HOW someone would have to prove domestic violence.
• I would like to hear more about the administration of this provision.
• It's not one of the top priority SECURE 2.0 items we're looking at right now. Will probably look at it next year when we look at plan design. I like the idea, but I'm always hesitant to add another way to take out money early. Seems like a loan could work as well.
• Most likely will, but no decision has been made
• We have not made any plans to adopt this provision yet, but I think it is a valid provision and should definitely be considered by our plan committee.
   

Not adding:

• Our plan does not allow for any special provisions.  We are a very small company with a safe harbor plan and the owners want the participants to save their money for retirement.
• Provisions such as this erodes an individual's preparation for a financially secure retirement.
• The only difference from this and UEW seems to be the option to pay it back; my members likely will not pay it back, so UEW should suffice for this population.
• This seems very specific. What about those in other dire situations?
• We don’t have standard hardships and therefore don't anticipating adding any of these enhanced provisions.
• We are primarily focusing on the required provisions of Secure 2.0 at this point.  We will review the optional provisions at a later time.