Leaderboard

I'm sure the plan has the required language that all service with the "employer" counts and then says for such purpose that employer means all employers required to be aggregated under Code Section .... (control group and affiliated service group rules) - there's your answer. Think in the other direction - I work for my US-based company for three years, am 40% vested and then transfer to a subsidiary based in Canada or Mexico or wherever. Am I terminated and eligible for a distribution? I don't think so, and so my vesting service shouldn't stop either.

I agree with CuseFan and I'll add that your plan probably has a section describing what happens when an employee transfers from an ineligible classification to an eligible one. That section is more than likely going to say that they become a participant on the date that they transfer to an eligible classification, provided they have satisfied the age and service requirements with the employer as of that date.

As far as I know your expectation is wrong. it has always been my understanding that a fiduciary can't ever fully delegate their duties. They always have to monitor and review what the experts do to make sure they do their job right. I don't think they can just assume a TPA has sent notices for example. They need to know they were sent in some way. If it is an internal trustee that is a participant did they get a copy of the notice for example? That is a big part of the Greatbanc settlement. It sets out guidelines, and I have always understood them as a guidelines not a safe harbor, to help trustee's understand if they have discharged their duty in regards to the stock appraisal. When you say are there guidelines that say you have discharged their duty and can't be assessed a penalty it sounds like you are looking for some kind of safe harbor rules regarding fiduciary duties. I think the reason you aren't finding anything is because they don't exist. I am happy to have an ERISA attorney, which I am not one, and tell me I am wrong. Every attorney I know on this topic says the way to defend yourself in this area is document your procedures and how you followed them. As long as the procedure was reasonable and they were followed you tend to have a strong defense in this area. As far as I know you can't just claim you hired professionals. They have to follow up to make sure the professional did their job.

One of my clients - a small 401(k) plan sponsor, emailed me copies of three K-1's they received for 2020, which is the first year their plan invested in these gas and oil businesses (LP's). The K-1's together show ordinary business income totals about $1,600. So, based on your quote it appears my client must file a 990-T for the 2020 UBTI under their their 401(k) plan. Sound right? This client's CPA thinks UBTI does not apply to a 401(k) plan. Obviously, there is a lot I am missing.

Just my opinion: If the QDRO language along with the plan document language are not clear whether the AP is entitled to the ER subsidy, I would go with the intent. If in the calculation of death benefits for a participant's beneficiary, the ER subsidy is or would be included, I would give it to the AP as well.

No idea whatsoever, but I offer the following: https://www.songfacts.com/facts/the-beatles/when-im-64

If the mistaken deposit wasn't really deferrals, then forfeiting it out from the wrong account shouldn't suddenly make it deferral money you couldn't later use, just because it had a bad label on it.

Deadline for IRA contributions is the due date for filing the individual tax return -- it was extended in 2020, when the 1040 deadline was extended to July 15; presumably that same relief automatically applies this year. See: https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/filing-and-payment-deadlines-questions-and-answers (re 2020 extension of contribution deadline) and IRS Publication 590-A, re general due date for IRA contributions (also see IRC 408(o)(3) => IRC 219(f)(3) -- due date is time for filing of return, not a specific April 15 date)

Which Form 5500 do you file for your plan? 5500 or 5500-SF (owner and employees?) 5500-EZ (owner only or owner & spouse) I would not go attempt to get penalty abatement for reasonable cause as you risk making a simple fix more complicated. Instead, I would use the established correction program available for your version of the 5500. It includes a user fee but it is worth it. The 5500 and 5500-SF uses The Delinquent Filer Voluntary Compliance Program (DFVCP) through the DOL. User fee is $750 per late return. Penalty Relief Program for Form 5500-EZ Late Filers is available through the IRS. User fee is $500 per late return. Do you work with a TPA for your plan or do you do all plan related things by yourself? If you have a TPA, they can certainly help you fix the late 5500.

If there are any losses in these corrections, it is up to the plan administrator to make the participants whole. If it was the investment company's fault or the TPA's fault, it is still incumbent on the plan administrator to pay for the losses--it wasn't the participant's fault. Then it's up tot he PA to seek relieve from the offending party.

I worked for the American Funds for 14 years in a retirement plans management role, and find this "explanation" to be pure B.S.

I wouldn't reduce the deferral excess allocation, but refund it. I'm not a big fan of mistake of fact processing. Who is making sure the participant is being "made whole" outside the plan? That the deferrals will be paid to the EE, but without doubling up on the reduction already taken from the deferrals?

That's an odd way to phrase an answer. It kind of sounds like whoever asked the question internally at the investment company didn't completely understand the response they got from their systems people. I have not seen anything like this. At the very least I would look for a bit more info on what they're doing with the amounts they "removed from the system". If these tiny amounts are being returned to the investment company as a service fee, hopefully that's described in their service agreement with the plan and disclosed appropriately.

Just a guess, did employees elect a fix dollar amount per pay period? Like $50 per pay period on the election form but some payroll they have no compensation and payroll is saying they "owe" that amount for the payroll they had no compensation? I agree with Bird. If that's their position it's a stupid one. It might make some sense in the case of health care premiums but I can't see where it would make sense for retirement plan contributions.

Taking an educated guess that this is a SIMPLE? Payroll companies are the bane of our existence...WTF does it mean to accrue contributions from a $0 paycheck?! IMO this is "simple" - if someone has a paycheck and has elected a $ or %, you withhold that $ or % from that paycheck, period. No paycheck, no withholding, no "accrual." Anything else is stupid.