Leaderboard

Here is a similar discussion if it is helpful.

I have seen QDROs that allocate 100% of the marital portion to the AP. I don't believe there is any limit, assuming both sides agree and it doesn't result in any additional net benefits.

Same here. They aren’t approving your document or amendment language when you submit under VCP. They’re saying the current adoption of the retroactive amendment is okay to execute - it won’t be considered as untimely if the plan gets audited. But they don’t review the language like they would if they were auditing. Submitting a Form 5310 or even a Form 5300 is more like an audit where you are asking the IRS to review the terms of the plan for tax qualification purposes. They can and will ask for older documents in that case.

Not in a VCP non-amender, but have in a 5310 determination letter application.

As long as you can write it into a document and administer it, it looks like it would be non-discriminatory. Unless you had a lot of low paid 5% owners but doesn't sound like that would be an issue in a 400 life 403(b).

To my mind, the Employer has to have some way to update the plan for ongoing law changes and resulting changes in the LRMs. More, some parts of EPCRS required reliance on a favorable letter, and after the IRS has published a required amendment, the previous letter (even without an expiration date) may not satisfy. Seems like a pre-approved document would be a no-brainer: relatively inexpensive with great reliance. I think the better question is "what alternative is better?" Maintaining the IDP long term likely isn't cost effective.

There is nothing that would compel an employer sponsoring an individually designed ESOP or any other type of qualified plan to adopt a preapproved plan. Since determination letters are no longer being issued for IDP's, the employer might want to switch to a preapproved plan to get the ability to rely upon the advisory or opinion letter resulting from the IRS' review of the volume submitter or prototype plan document. This gives the employer the assurance that the form of the plan satisfies the plan qualification requirements applicable to that type of plan. In light of the IRS' cessation of determination letters for IDPs, some law firms have taken to offering to issue opinion letters that the form of the plan satisfies applicable plan qualification requirements. However, the price for that type of letter is likely going to be very steep, possibly requiring the payment of several thousand dollars. The reason for the steep price is that the law firm is effectively guaranteeing the qualification of the form of the plan.

Wouldn't the 401(k) plan sponsored by the other controlled group member be a successor plan to begin with, making the first plan termination problematic?

Generally plans can be (and often are) terminated in connection with a sale without any prior participant notice. Of course, it's always better to have a clear approach going into it so everyone is on the same page. There may have been one that has not been communicated to you (not sure your role in the process). If the plan was not terminated by a resolution effective before the stock sale closed, there will likely be a successor plan issue as I assume the buyer (or another member of the buyer's controlled group) has or will start a 401(k) plan. The seller's plan may need to be merged into a plan of the buyer.