Leaderboard

Corrective distributions - 8E

I fully admit I am a DC guy not a DB guy. So what comes next could be worthless. However, in the DC world if a plan was changed to stop people from being able to accrue a benefit that were still employed by the plan sponsor the conversation would be if we have to make everyone 100% vested. The Partial Plan Termination rules, which as far as I can tell cover both DB and DC plans, are clear a plan amendment can trigger an event that would make the affected people 100% vested. So if this withdrawal is anything like a plan amendment I think one might need to ask, "are these people really 100% vested?" Like I said I am happy to be told this is nothing like what I am talking about and I should go back to my DC world and be a good boy!

There might be legit reasons to get a new EIN but if it's the same company the successor plan rules apply.

I can't speak to what you may or may not recall, but I don't see any problems with anything you described.

The big difference is the universal availability rule—403(b) plans have to cover everybody, immediately, with limited exceptions. A 401(k) plan on the other hand can have a service requirement. The flip side of that is a 401(k) plan is subject to the ADP test whereas a 403(b) is not.

I am not really sure, but assuming the participants are still in the union and there has been no separation from service, I would think they would continue to earn vesting credit in their MEP benefits in the future. Not 100% sure of that. If they are leaving the union, then they are probably term non-vested in the MEP benefits. The MEP would have no obligation to then, nor would they generally care about people who leave the union. This is something the labor lawyer should be asking about as they negotiate the withdrawal. The "recompense" would have to come from the employer, not the MEP. The employer is choosing to leave so they are the one who needs to "make it right" for their employees if they want them to go along with the withdrawal.

I wouldn't. I don't think Overtime, bonuses, commissions would be considered "subsidies. I think "Base compensation" or "Base Pay" is good enough, as long as it's calculated the same way for everyone.

You could probably do that in administrative procedures. I mean what if they change payroll systems and and "Regular" becomes something else?

If it's definitely determinable and passed 414(s) testing I don't see a problem. So as long as you have "Base Compensation" defined and trackable you should be fine.