Talk:Retirement plan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve Tax related articles to a feature-quality standard. |
Having created several articles to help round out the retirement plan genre, I've moved significant (and very good quality) content from the following articles around:
Although I tried to integrate everything logically, there is still considerable smoothing to be done with respect to standardization of terminology, voice, and style. Please consider these pages as a whole when making edits and modifications and let's try to get all the content arranged in the logical spots. Thanks! Chris 02:52, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Careful on the material you move around. If we want to be accurate for the IRS and Erisa treatment of these plans, you'll need some good resources before moving a lot around. Currently the coverage of these topics is of course shaky at best. I have not attacked them full on because I lost one of my best resource books on the topic. - Taxman 04:00, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
- Of course, there is the additional difficulty that 3 of the above topics are only in the US. I'm not sure if almost all of the specific material on retirement plans in the US shouldn't be moved to a 'Retirement plans in the US' article. As far as I understand it, Defined benefit pension plans are much more common in Europe and DC plans are not common, while the reverse is now true in the US for a number of reasons. Canada has both. Their RRSP plans are DC at least. I even thought the terms defined contribution and defined benefit are entirely US in origin and usage. I could be wrong. - Taxman 17:22, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree, a Retirement plans in the US article would be a good idea, along with similar articles on other countries. In particular, material on specific regulations would be more appropriate in separate country articles, as jargon like "Section 615 schemes" or "401(k) plans" is pretty meaningless to most people from outside the country in question.
- I can confirm that the terms defined contribution and defined benefit are not US specific, and are used pretty much everywhere.
- Enchanter 19:04, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
- Good to know. Though the usage guidlines say the title should be Retirement plans in the United States. I'll start or contribute to that since that is obviously where most of my knowledge lies. - Taxman 02:27, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
- Well I started that article. That is the one I will work on the most since it is what I know about. That way I can write what I know and have references for and we can all try to work together to write the generally applicable article here. I'll try to remove the US related minutae out of this article. - Taxman 22:08, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
- Good to know. Though the usage guidlines say the title should be Retirement plans in the United States. I'll start or contribute to that since that is obviously where most of my knowledge lies. - Taxman 02:27, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
- Of course, there is the additional difficulty that 3 of the above topics are only in the US. I'm not sure if almost all of the specific material on retirement plans in the US shouldn't be moved to a 'Retirement plans in the US' article. As far as I understand it, Defined benefit pension plans are much more common in Europe and DC plans are not common, while the reverse is now true in the US for a number of reasons. Canada has both. Their RRSP plans are DC at least. I even thought the terms defined contribution and defined benefit are entirely US in origin and usage. I could be wrong. - Taxman 17:22, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
