Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Marie

Missing everything since 1997

Recommended Posts

Below the scenario:

Plan was originally effective 1997. Taking over the administration of the plan 2019. 

No copies of the original plan document, the GUST and the EGTRRA restatement. Some amendments are in place, most interim amendments.

So would we have to create all these documents and submit to VCP?

Not sure why I am not in full agreement with approved plan of action.

Any guidance would be really appreciated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lot at stake for over 20.  Seems like this should be handled under the guidance of an ERISA attorney, and with attorney-client privilege to protect the plan sponsor as much as possible.   Really hard to get more specific here as much depends on the facts.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the same boat with another client....

Do you need to provide all the restatements (GUST, EGTRRA, PPA, etc.) or just the original and the interim amendments between the original document and the newly restated document?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I second the notion of getting an ERISA attorney involved.  Who knows what else was missed....

Who was administering this plan throughout the years?  Who was doing the 5500's?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see us getting involved without an ERISA attorney being included.

We want to help a client do everything possible to keep a plan in (or return it to) compliance. But don't ever let the client's liability become your liability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, attorney needed.  I've done non-amender VCPs where there is already a plan document and they have been operating the plan in accordance with such.  But where there is no actual complete document over the course of decades, who knows what the plan provisions were?  Also an employer that doesn't have any complete document is likely one where attention to plan operations was, shall we say, casual?  And a plan that has been around that long implies more money in it, and more participants over the years, so greater downside risk.

Not only is this not making the client's liability your liability, getting an attorney involved is also protecting the client.  Issues can be discussed under attorney client privilege, helping to protect the client should IRS or DOL get involved or participant litigation.  And, though it seems far-fetched, there are possible criminal issues that could arise, who knows what has gone on?   As a TPA, anything we learn is discoverable, potentially putting the client at risk.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...