1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |IRS Announces Inflation-Adjusted Dollar Limits for 2004

IRS Announces Inflation-Adjusted Dollar Limits for 2004

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.22.03

In IR-2003-122, the IRS announced the limitations applicable to contributions and benefits under various employee benefit provisions of the Code for 2004, as adjusted for changes in the cost of living. The 2004 limits are as follows:

Item
2004
2003
Maximum annual annuity payable from a tax-qualified defined benefit pension plan at age 65
$165,000
$160,000
Maximum "annual addition" to a participant's account under a tax-qualified defined contribution plan
$41,000
$40,000
Elective Deferrals under Code Section 402(g)
$13,000
$12,000
SIMPLE plan elective contributions
$9,000
$8,000
(2003)
Section 401(a)(17) Limit on annual amount of a participant's compensation that can be taken into account for contribution or benefit purposes under a tax-qualified retirement plan
$205,000
$200,000
Section 401(a)(17) compensation limit with COLA adjustment
$305,000
$300,000
Compensation threshold for definition of "highly compensated employee"
$90,000
$90,000
Compensation limit for determining "key employees" for top-heavy plan purposes
$130,000
$130,000
Compensation limit for definition of "control employee for fringe benefit valuation purposes
$80,000
$80,000
Compensation limit for definition of "control employee for fringe benefit valuation purposes
$80,000
$80,000
ESOP five-year distribution limit
$830,000
$810,000

 

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights