Which profession is said to be non qualified

1. “Non‑qualified” is a technical tax/benefits term — not a label for a profession

In U.S. tax and benefits literature, “non‑qualified” refers to types of plans or income that don’t meet specific statutory requirements — for example, nonqualified retirement plans are employer‑sponsored arrangements that fall outside ERISA guidelines and therefore don’t get the same tax advantages as “qualified” plans ^{[2] [1]}. Similarly, recent IRS guidance distinguishes “qualified” and “non‑qualified” tips for a proposed “no tax on tips” deduction, listing which professions’ tips would qualify for the break and which would not ^[3]. These are administrative categories, not accusations about professional competence ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. The IRS list: “qualified” professions for a tip deduction — conversely, some are “non‑qualified”

Reporting on an IRS proposed regulation shows the agency is defining which professions’ tips are “qualified” for a temporary “no tax on tips” deduction and which are “non‑qualified,” producing a list of about 68 professions that may qualify for the 2025–2028 filings ^[3]. This usage affects tax treatment of tip income, not professional legitimacy. The IRS sought feedback on proposed regulations that explicitly define qualified versus non‑qualified tips ^[3].

3. “Non‑qualified” retirement plans target executives, not entire professions

Financial sources explain that non‑qualified retirement plans exist precisely because of rules that make “qualified” plans broadly available but subject to limits and nondiscrimination testing; non‑qualified plans are often selective benefits for executives or key employees and are exempt from those ERISA tests ^{[1] [2]}. The implication: “non‑qualified” here is design‑and‑taxation jargon, again unrelated to labeling particular professions as unfit or illegitimate ^{[1] [2]}.

4. Courtroom rhetoric can use “not doing their professions” to imply political or social behavior

A courtroom report quotes Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju saying “doctors, engineers are not doing their professions but engaging in anti‑national activities” during bail hearings — a rhetorical claim about conduct, not a technical classification of “non‑qualified” professionals ^[4]. That statement is an argument in litigation and public discourse; available sources do not confirm it as an objective finding or a legal designation ^[4]. If you seek to treat such statements as facts, note they originate from an advocate’s courtroom submission, not from independent certification bodies ^[4].

5. Common misunderstandings: context matters when you see “non‑qualified”

Many readers will conflate casual uses (someone “not doing their profession”) with regulatory labels. The provided sources show the term is often applied in narrow, formal senses in tax and benefits rules (qualified vs non‑qualified plans or tips) and separately appears in rhetorical political or legal statements — those are different registers and should not be merged ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}.

6. What the sources do not say

Available sources do not identify any profession that is officially designated as “non qualified” by a regulator or standard‑setting body in a general sense; instead, the nearest usages are administrative tax categories and a courtroom claim about professional conduct ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. They also do not provide independent evidence that doctors or engineers broadly are abandoning their professions to engage in the conduct alleged in the courtroom remark ^[4].

7. Takeaway for readers

When you encounter “non‑qualified,” ask which frame applies: tax/ERISA rules (technical), IRS tip guidance (tax treatment), or rhetorical/legal argument (opinion in litigation). The implications differ dramatically — technical categories affect taxation and benefits; rhetorical uses are contestable claims in public debate ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}.