On 22 Aug 2005 19:10:09 GMT, Tad Borek <borekfm[at]pacbell.net> wrote:
- quote -

Yes, my sister lost her regular 401k and her daughter's college fund to
her 2nd ex (after she had retired at age 49), but she got the home fully
paid for. He seemed like a nice guy until he stopped taking his
medication.

winterqqqq[at]hotmail.com wrote:
- quote -

Dennis,
Though the tax code section creating them is different, a Roth 401k
still needs to be part of a qualified plan, which means it's covered by
ERISA (the federal law that includes the creditor protections you're
probably thinking of). An exception might be a single-employee plan
which is a special case eg a sole proprietor who sets up a solo-401k
plan including a Roth alternative.

Some of this is kind of moot though...IRAs are not covered by ERISA and
that's why there has been variation state to state wrt creditor
protection. But the new bankruptcy law provides additional protections
for IRAs, so the differences b/t 401k and IRA protection have narrowed,
at least wrt bankruptcy.

Keep in mind bankruptcy isn't the only creditor issue to consider and
these assets could in effect be tapped into in other scenarios - eg
ex-spouse. Complicated topic, if you have real asset-protection concerns
you should bounce these questions off someone specializing in it.

-Tad

Why do you ask?

Are you also interested in changes to bankruptcy laws that are coming in the
next few months?

<winterqqqq[at]hotmail.com> wrote
- quote -

Is the Roth 401K, as planned, intended to be more like a 401K or more
like an IRA when it comes to protection from creditors? In other words,
if your retirement funds are in a 401K are they protected from
lawsuits. I know that there are state by state variations when it
comes to the the IRA's but I think that 401K's are protected everywhere
and am wondering if Roth401K's will also be. Any thoughts or knowledge
here.

Thank you,

Dennis