Leaderboard

Nope; you are reading too much into it. Self certification will avoid any issues for the PA. There is no way the PA can KNOW with certainty that an individual does NOT meet any of the qualifications for certification. And when we get additional guidance from IRS/Treasury (which we will, and I venture soon), it will be even more clear that there is no way a PA can deny a claim when the participant certifies it.

I wouldnt say impossible, but it's rare. Even if we increase the odds of having actual knowledge to the contrary, nothing in the IRS Q&A states or implies a duty to question or verify. Unless you know they are lying when they make the statement, you dont have actual knowledge to the contrary and you may rely on participant certification. Dont ask dont tell works fine for CRDs

Did you try asking them? 952-806-4300 TSC TO ACQUIRE CBA’S RETIREMENT PLAN ADMINISTRATION BUSINESS Edina, MN – June 17, 2019 – TSC, Inc. and Corporate Benefit Administrators, Inc. (CBA) are pleased to announce that they have entered into an agreement for TSC to acquire CBA’s retirement plan administration business effective July 1, 2019. Through combining the strengths of these two successful organizations, the acquisition will provide many benefits to their employees, clients, and referral sources. CBA’s St. Cloud office will represent a second location for TSC’s operations. “CBA is a respected third party administration firm that is very well aligned with TSC’s business operations. It’s most valuable assets are the employees who have earned a reputation of providing excellent service to their clients and referral sources. TSC is excited to add the talented CBA workforce to its company.” said Matt Slyter, Vice President at TSC. “The acquisition of CBA not only strengthens our already very accomplished staff, but it allows us to continue focusing on innovation and product development while investing greater resources into our employee-owned company.” TSC and CBA are working diligently to ensure a smooth transition for everyone affected by the acquisition. Al Buckner and Joyce Buckner, partners at CBA, add “We’re excited about this opportunity for everyone. TSC is clearly committed to making this an effective transition, retaining the current CBA employees to continue working with their same clients, while offering our clients enhanced technology and compliance support. We could not have found a better partner for this acquisition, with TSC’s strong culture of customized, high-quality client service and outstanding support for our investment advisor business partners.” About TSC – Twin Cities based TSC provides clients throughout the United States with expert consulting, plan design, and administration solutions. Founded in 1966, TSC has grown to become one of the premier independent third-party administration firms in the country. Upon completion of the acquisition, TSC will have approximately 75 employees serving more than 3,000 employers and their financial advisors.

Point of clarification - when you use the word "suspends" I'm assuming you are asking about ending the QACA SH outright - not merely delaying the deposits. If they want to, they can. The plan amendment would need to specify. The plan is not required to end the autoenrollment. In my experience, the plan often keeps the autoenrollment provision when terminating the safe harbor contribution. This helps the ADP testing at year end.

$100k contribution, $100k deduction, $5K gains/earning. Otherwise, it would have to be held in suspense, and think we have agreed that is improper right?

You are correct that spouse being laid off does not qualify. I would be very surprised if the IRS didnt add that when they issue guidance though. That said, you are reading way too much into what the "Administrstor must know". An employee could have a second job, so the admin would only know that hours had not been reduced with the employer. Another employer still qualifies. I'll double down on "you don't know what you dont know". Just because the employer has not been notified that the employee or employees spouse/dependent has been diagnosed, does NOT mean that the employer had actual knowledge that a diagnosis has not been made. Actual knowledge to the contrary is like knowing the employees house didnt burn down because he lives in your spare bedroom.

Austin - I have to say I agree with the previous posters. While I grant that a very small employer would generally "know" that most of these statements were PROBABLY not applicable, there are certainly circumstances where you might THINK you "know" when you really don't. For example, suppose your business partner was diagnosed with Covid, but did NOT disclose this to you? I realize this raises other serious issues, but for purposes of the certification, you don't KNOW. Another situation that comes to mind is a dependent. "Your spouse or dependent is diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 or with COVID-19 by a test approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;" - again, MAYBE their spouse got diagnosed and they have not told you, for fear of adverse consequences such as being forced to stay at home and miss work. MAYBE they have a dependent that you don't know about - a child from an illicit affair, etc., etc... I suppose I can see your point, if an active employee sends you an e-mail and says, "I want a Covid distribution because I've been laid off" and the employee is still working for you every day, then yes, in such a situation, I'd refuse to accept a self-certification. But other than a completely ridiculous situation like that, I feel very confident that the Plan Administrator is allowed to accept self-certification without a second thought.

Take just this part of the example. What if their spouse was laid off due to the virus? Hasn't this person had an adverse financial consequence due to the virus?

Not a chance.

No, I cant get there based on the Q&A. It just means you cannot accept a statement you know to be false. Actual knowledge to the contrary doesnt imply a duty to confirm. Absence of a notification that an employee has been diagnosed (or spouse or dependent) isnt the same as as actual knowledge that there has not been a diagnosis, nor does it mean that you have to confirm/verify the diagnosis since you haven't been notified. You might want to verify for other reasons, but you are not required to for the distribution.