Leaderboard

It is not that an audit for the 1 month plan year isn't required (it is). Instead, the audit requirement is allowed to be met by having the auditor's report for the subsequent plan year expanded to include the short period.

Check the statute. My interpretation (and that of a number of court decisions) of the provision to the effect that the AP may be treated as a surviving spouse to the extent provided in the QDRO is that in a DB plan with a QPSA, the AP must be expressly awarded some interest in the survivor annuity or the AP will get nothing if the AP does not start benefits (the 50% portion of the pension benefit described in the post) before the participant dies. One way to look at it is that the death benefit is a different benefit that the regular benefit. If the AP is not awarded some of the death benefit, the AP gets none. While the proposition is untested, I think that the plan can adopt QDRO procedures that have a default to cover the failure to include a provision addressing death benefits (which is legal malpractice). For example, the QDRO Procedures can provide that, absent terms in the contrary in the QDRO, the result of failure to specify the AP's interest in the QPSA will be as suggested by Calavera: the AP will get the death benefit associated with the portion of the regular benefit awarded to the AP. I do not recommend such a provision on the QDRO procedures. What can be argued on behalf of the AP is that the AP should be compensated for receiving nothing from the plan by the malpractice insurance carrier of the AP's lawyer who failed to assure that the AP did not get stiffed (pun intended) by the pre-retirement death of the participant, to the delight and benefit of the subsequent spouse.

Thanks. I was able to convince the sponsor that refunding the deferral will be cheaper in the long run :)

I agree with both.

I generally see combo 457(b)/(f) plans commingle all investments in one rabbi trust and track the (b) vs. (f) balances separately in recordkeeping.

I'll second this

I vote yes. And I vote to find another TPA firm.

if it was a separate interest QDRO, her piece of the benefit inures to her when filed and she in essence becomes the participant for that benefit, except for a subsequent J&S on her commencement.

Yes, IRC 414(p)(5), includes "To the extent provided in any qualified domestic relations order...."

If no survivor benefits were included, and QDRO was written properly, death of the participant should not have any effect on the award benefit. Ex-wife should still be entitled to 50% of the portion of the pension earned during their marriage. New wife should be entitled to survivor benefit of the remaining pre-divorce and all post-divorce benefits. See if QDRO has any sections describing "If participant dies before commencement then..."

the PW contributions are not compensation. person's w-2 would be $16, safe harbor would be $.48, and the profit sharing (or PW) would be $3.52 as it could be offset by the safe harbor (document should have that specific language).

I had an office manager once who was skimming from the company. She inflated her salary and gave herself a higher contribution than the staff. She eventually got caught and went to jail. Fortunately the client didn't think it was out fault that we didn't catch her skimming, but in retrospect the signs were there for the potential for her to have been misdirecting us for her own benefit. So with that said, IAW CuseFan. If the non-owner client contact is directing you to allocate more to her/him than the owner, a call to the owner is warranted.

Sure; risk of losing subsequent installments by not completing the additional year is a SRF.

Caesar didn't get his done on time and look what happened to him. So beware the Ides of March!

Is there still the understanding that there is no Federal income tax withholding simply do to the vesting and consequent income inclusion of deferred compensation under Section 457(f) where there is nothing being paid until later? Is there a more recent statement from the IRS on this than the 1999 TAM, either another TAM or PLR or even in a speech?