Leaderboard

How could he work less than 1000 hours from 5/2/14 - 5/2/15 and more than 1000 from 1/1/15 - 5/2/15?

Fiduciaries get in trouble when they venture beyond established duties and plan terms to "help" participants.

More specifically, that individual doesn't need to have a contribution allocated, but is not excludable for coverage testing. He or she is treated as eligible but not benefiting.

The insurer is the responsible tax filing party for the Forms 1095-B, not the employer. I would suggest you deflect employee questions to the insurer. If it does not like that, then they might be more willing to share the information with you.

January 1, 2016 (I see now that Tom already answered this)

You may have a few issues confused. If a participant goes from FT -> PT they remain a participant. The participant would be subject to whatever allocation conditions are spelled out in the plan. So if the plan has a 1,000 hours requirement to receive an allocation the participant would generally not be eligible for the allocation. It is possible that a participant who would not generally be eligible for an allocation may have to receive one if the plan is top-heavy or would fail some nondiscrimination test if the employee does not receive an allocation. This might be triggered by a "fail-safe" in the existing plan document or might require an amendment to the plan in some cases.

I am assuming the following ee did not work 1000 hours from 5/2/14 - 5/2/15 but did work 1000 hours in 2015 (but not by 5/2) otherwise the question makes no sense. I would say you are now in a new 12 month measuring period 1/1 - 12/31 and so the person doesn't enter until 1/1/2016 (assuming of course the document reads that way using 1000 hours in a 12 month period...) now if the clients wants to say they worked 1000 hours from 1/1/ -5/2 (must be in the pension industry running ADP tests! to accomplish that)

I thought we'd be good boys and girls and complete them, unless, say, a plan was terminated and it was an utter and complete waste of time (as opposed to simply a waste of time). After doing one or two, now my attitude is more that...(quoting above)...optional means "skip it." I might be in a good mood and do a few more but it's hard to see any benefit from doing it.

Again with the Wife A business! Why the fixation on that?

Does anyone put the true reason some audit firms are fired: "The guy was a moron." "They had no idea what they were doing!" They wanted to stop deferrals when people went over $265,000 in comp" We usually put: Business or decision or firm merger.

I hate to keep quoting the ERISA Outline book (actually I don't), but I found this in Chapter 6: Plan Distributions - Section V (Death benefits) 1.c. Power of attorney. If a person holds a power of attorney (POA) with respect to a plan participant, can the POA change the participant's beneficiary? This was the issue in Clouse v.Philadelphia, Bethlehem & New England Railroad Co., 787 F.Supp. 93 (E.D.Pa. 1992). The case involved a general power of attorney. The court concluded, in reliance of Section 37 of the Restatement (Second), Agency, that a general power of attorney did not authorize the POA to change the beneficiary designation. A more specifically-drafted POA was needed. Also note that the terms of the plan document need to be consulted to ensure that the plan's procedures for changing beneficiaries are followed. You may have already seen this, but I thought I would throw it out there anyway.