Leaderboard

There's a lot there, so a few points to keep it simple: What you're describing are non-cashable flex credits run through a Section 125 cafeteria plan. Only Section 125 qualified benefits can be allocated through flex credits. HRAs are not a Section 125 qualified benefit. An HRA cannot be funded directly or indirectly by a cafeteria plan. ALEs need to make sure there are sufficient flex credits that qualify as a "health flex contribution" to ensure the plan meets the ACA affordability test. Flex credits that can be allocated to the health FSA generally need to be cashable to avoid losing excepted benefit status. Only cashable flex credits can be allocated to the 401(k). For a list of qualified benefits, see slide 6 here: 2021 ABD Section 125 Cafeteria Plans Guide For an overview of flex credit issues, see here: https://www.theabdteam.com/blog/how-aca-affects-flex-credits-2/ Here's a "health flex contribution" overview: https://www.theabdteam.com/blog/how-the-aca-affordability-increase-to-9-83-affects-employers/ How Do Flex Credits Affect the Affordability Determination? Flex credits will reduce the dollar amount of the employee-share of the cheapest plan option providing minimum value that is used to determine affordability if they meet a three-part test to qualify as a “health flex contribution”: The employee may not opt to receive the amount as a taxable benefit (i.e., it is not a cashable flex credit); The employee may use the amount to pay for minimum essential coverage (i.e., the employer’s major medical plan); and The employee may use the amount exclusively for medical/dental/vision coverage costs. Action Item: If you offer a defined contribution-style flex credit approach to employees, make sure that a sufficient portion are designated as “health flex contributions” to qualify under an affordability safe harbor. This will require at least some of the flex credits be non-cashable and designated for health plan purposes only. Here's the guidance prohibiting any interaction between the cafeteria plan (including flex credits) and HRA funding: IRS Notice 2002-45: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-02-45.pdf IV. HRAs and Cafeteria Plans Employer contributions to an HRA may not be attributable to salary reduction or otherwise provided under a § 125 cafeteria plan. An accident or health plan funded pursuant to salary reduction is not an HRA and is subject to the rules under § 125. ... An arrangement is not treated as an HRA if the arrangement interacts with a cafeteria plan in such a way as to permit employees to use salary reduction indirectly to fund the HRA. Therefore, where an employee who participates in a reimbursement arrangement has a choice among two or more specified accident or health plans to be used in conjunction with the reimbursement arrangement (or a choice among various maximum reimbursement amounts credited for a coverage period) and there is a correlation between the maximum reimbursement amount available under the HRA for the coverage period (disregarding amounts carried forward from previous coverage periods) and the amount of salary reduction election for the specified accident and health plan, then the salary reduction is attributed to the reimbursement arrangement even if the amount of salary reduction election is equal to or less than the actual cost of the other accident or health coverage.

I have used Dietrich for this exact circumstance and found them to be excellent. While there are many annuity providers that won't sell an annuity unless they have the annuitant's signature, Dietrich can find one who will.

Update, today in the mail I received the big flat envelope with my new enrollment card at the bottom, as it has come in prior years. I also received the same thing in a standard envelope printed on regular paper, mailed separately. They show the "Issue Date" as 10/1/21. Go figure.

If they had terminated employment prior to their statutory entry date, they would be part of the otherwise excludable group. Once they satisfy statutory eligibility they become part of the "regular" testing group. It comes down to the method you are using to test coverage. Since you would normally be testing coverage using the annual method, you test on the last day of the year and include all employees who were not excludable during the year. This person in question met the plan's minimum age and service conditions, so therefore they are treated as non-excludable in the coverage test. When disaggregating otherwise excludable employees, you disaggregate employees who met the minimum age and service conditions under the plan, but not the maximum age and service conditions of 410(a). Since this person had satisfied the maximum age and service conditions of 410(a) during the year, they cannot be part of the disaggregated plan. ADP testing follows coverage testing, so the people you disaggregated as otherwise excludables for coverage are your otherwise excludables for ADP.

I renewed in 2018 and never received anything. I had the pay.gov receipt, followed up with them, they said it got lost cause it was in “the old system”. I think I had to follow up again, and eventually it showed up something in 2019. Just sent my 2021 renewal in a few weeks ago, haven’t received anything so far.

This.

SF

Update: ASPPA has contacted the IRS about this and they are looking into it. This was my fourth renewal and the first time I've received anything from the IRS about a renewal.

No doubt, and these departments always seem to be understaffed - so my derision is cast not at the people, but at the institution, LOL! But where a well-staffed IRS might mean quicker turnaround on VCP and d-letter submissions, it could also mean an uptick in audit activity, so I'm OK with them running on a skeleton crew!

I remember calling FT William about this: Hello Steve,Per the DOL regulations that one participant plans must be filed on EZs starting this year, the warning is triggered if the participant count is 1 or 2, to ensure the owner and spouse scenario is covered. If this warning does not apply to your filing and the plan is not a one participant plan, you would continue with your filing as normal. Let me know if you need anything else and have a great day.Best regards,

ASC did the same thing, too. So yeah, I bet they advised their approved software vendors to check for it.