jpod Posted September 19, 2002 Share Posted September 19, 2002 Small incorporated employer sets up a medical reimbursement plan with an annual reimbursement limit of $2,000 per eligible employee. This is NOT a cafeteria plan; it is funded with employer money. The plan covers out-of-pocket expenses for medical care for the employee and his or her spouse and dependents. The sole owner runs the business and works full time and the sole owner's wife is a legitimate employee of the corporation and also works full time. There are unrelated eligible employees as well. It seems to me the husband and wife, collectively, have a limit of $4,000 for expenses for themselves and their dependents, and there is nothing in 105(h) or the regulations under 105(h) to block this. Anyone disagree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpod Posted September 19, 2002 Author Share Posted September 19, 2002 As a follow-up, it occurred to me that the wife is constructively the "sole owner" too under the Section 318 attribution rules, but I do not believe that creates a discrimination problem simply because she is allowed to participate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now