Leaderboard

Are you sure the match formula is mandatory and isn't discretionary? It isn't uncommon for them to tell employees how they plan on running the discretionary match if they make it but it is still discretionary.. Re-read the SPD and other notices very carefully to see if they hedge if the match will be given with some kind of language that points to the employer having discretion. It doesn't ever hurt to ask but if you didn't get a match based on the facts given it doesn't sound like it would be a last day of employment issue.

Mmmm. My OCD made me spend about 20 minutes looking at the new Qs, then at old Schedule Ps to see if we always had separate EINs for those plans on a platform where we had no reason to have one, other than for the sake of putting it on the Schedule P - we did always have separate EINs. I wouldn't go getting EINs now. They might really mean the payor's EIN (a la Schedule R). I can't imagine they want to be giving out EINs that aren't going to be used.

From my way back days, I thought only the IRS could put a lien on a participant's benefit. But maybe that was a lien and not an in-service distribution to satisfy some IRS tax/penalty... ? [i am not a lawyer, but] If it was neither an IRS tax lien or a court order determined by the plan administrator to be a QDRO (which would never be the case for a court order to discharge a debt owed to a non-dependent), the plan administrator has a fiduciary obligation to reject the court order. So if the plan complied and paid it out, the participant would have what would probably have been a sound cause of action against the plan administrator. If the participant owed somebody some money but had no funds other than those held by the plan, the creditor is plain out of luck until and unless the participant directs the plan administrator to pay the money to the participant. The money can never be paid directly to the creditor.

Another key advantage of a QDRO: it's the legal exception to the anti-alienation clause of IRC 401(a)(13).