Beneficiary Designation

The IRA branch states that ERISA preemption and the QJSA/QPSA spousal-consent rules do NOT apply to IRAs and that the custodial agreement (contract) controls, phrased with a 'generally' hedge plus an express attorney-confirm sentence for SEP/SIMPLE IRAs tied to an employer arrangement (which can carry ERISA Title I status in some configurations). Authority: 29 USC 1055(b) applicable-plan scope; intake-config ira option help text. Confirm the hedge strength.

No per-stirpes or per-capita distribution language is injected absent a client election (intake collects none); the primary designation-language block states plainly that the drafted language names beneficiaries directly, that carrier/plan default rules control if a named beneficiary predeceases, and that a per-stirpes structure is available as a revision. Authority: AI-as-scrivener (never invent disposition the client did not choose). Confirm posture vs collecting a per-stirpes election at intake.

additional_primaries / additional_contingents free-text renders VERBATIM as the client provided it (scrivener posture), prefaced with a transcription note and the percentages-must-total-100 rule. The math is NOT validated mechanically; the reviewing attorney checks the allocation before delivery. Confirm verbatim-passthrough posture.

When the account type is plan_529 and no successor owner was named, the packet states that many plan agreements route account control through the probate estate when no successor owner is on file. That is a generalized claim about plan-agreement defaults (plan-agreement-dependent, not statutory). Confirm or soften.

KRS 391.315(1)(b) expressly preserves ownership questions between the surviving party and a surviving spouse dower/curtesy interest after a financial-institution payout. The packet deliberately does NOT advise on dower/curtesy interplay (single-designation flat-fee scope). Confirm the omission is acceptable or direct an added caution sentence.

If the client checks is_married_naming_non_spouse but selected a non-ERISA account type, the packet does NOT assert the QJSA/QPSA rule applies; it renders an attorney-review flag stating the reviewing attorney will confirm whether the account is in fact ERISA-covered before the client relies on the packet. Confirm handling.

The rendered packet has NO signature block. The operative signature happens on the carrier form (completion guidance step). This is deliberate scope fidelity - a signature block would invite treating the packet as the operative designation. Confirm.

The minor-beneficiary attorney-review flag names the Kentucky Uniform Transfers to Minors Act custodianship option WITHOUT a KRS chapter cite, because the UTMA chapter has not been pulled into the verbatim source library and unverified cite numbers are never written. Confirm wording or direct a source pull to add the cite.

The 'other' account-type branch renders generic contract-controls framing (TOD registration agreement / annuity contract / plan document) plus an attorney-review flag that the reviewing attorney will confirm the correct form and any special execution requirements. Confirm the generic framing covers the intake 'other' option scope (TOD securities, annuity, employer stock plan).

The ERISA spousal-consent applies-branch keeps the checker-pinned marker sentence ABSOLUTE (SPOUSAL CONSENT IS REQUIRED BEFORE THIS DESIGNATION CAN TAKE EFFECT) and states the 29 USC 1055(c)(2)(A) consent elements faithfully, but the closing administrator sentence is HEDGED ('in nearly all cases the plan administrator will not honor the designation without it') because 29 USC 1055 carves out real plan classes where the absolute would be false: (b)(3) Treasury-determined 26 USC 404(c) plans substantially limited to pre-1976 participants; (b)(4) a plan may condition spousal benefits on the marriage having lasted the 1-year period ending on the earlier of the annuity starting date or the participant's death; (c)(2)(B) consent excused where it is established there is no spouse, the spouse cannot be located, or other Treasury-prescribed circumstances (federal/29-usc-1055.txt lines 49-51, 73). The packet deliberately does NOT enumerate these edge classes for the customer - intake cannot detect them and the reviewing attorney can. NOTE: execution_instructions step_4 retains the stronger 'The plan will not honor the designation without it' phrasing, conditioned on the packet asserting consent is required. Ratify the hedge strength (and step_4's strength) or direct different wording.

KNOWN NON-FLAG (documented; deliberately NOT mechanically detected): a customer who checks is_married_naming_non_spouse while typing 'spouse' as the primary beneficiary relationship renders a packet whose SPOUSAL CONSENT section asserts they are naming someone other than their spouse directly alongside a primary block reading 'Relationship to account holder: spouse' - a contradiction visible on the face of the packet. primary_relationship is free text ('wife', 'my husband', 'spouse (separated)', misspellings, other languages), so keying a checker rule or normalizer branch off string-matching it would be unreliable in both directions (false trips and silent misses). The reviewing attorney resolves the contradiction at review - the packet is never delivered unreviewed. Confirm the attorney-at-review posture vs adding an intake-side soft warning.