Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/18/2024 in all forums
-
Thank you Dave and Lois Baker and Colleagues
Dave Baker and 5 others reacted to AndyH for a topic
The end of December marked the end (at least for now) of my 41+ years in this business, starting as a part time DC system programmer (before I knew what a "forfeiture" was) and ending as an Enrolled Actuary with all the ASPPA exams completed as well. I have also been a Benefitslink Board participant for more than 23 years. Here, as well as through the exams, is where I learned my stuff. I am grateful for the learning, teaching and helping opportunities (and more than a little fun) created by Dave and Lois Baker through this awesome system. Their efforts aren't appreciated enough. Thanks also to the countless Board participants that have educated and helped me over the years; and I hope I've been able able to help others as well. I still plan to linger now and then but goodbye and Happy New Year for now! Thanks again Dave and Lois.6 points -
401k Plan terminated
Luke Bailey and 2 others reacted to Lou S. for a topic
The onus will be on them to show they paid you but it may be difficult to track down the responsible party for a plan terminated in 2010. It's possible you were paid from the original plan and you forgot but they never removed you from the SSA rolls, or they did remove you but SSA didn't update. It's possible you were paid from the acquiring plan and the same thing happened. It's possible you were a lost participant at the time of termination and your benefit was sent to an IRA in your name when the Plan was terminated, if that's the case the Plan should have records as to where the funds were sent and you could take it up with that custodian. The above is all just speculation on my part and may or may not reflect what happened in your particular case. At this point you are looking for records that are at least 13 years old on a terminated retirement plan where all the assets have presumably long since been paid out. This is a great example of why you shouldn't leave funds at your prior companies retirement plan if you can help it or if you do, make sure you keep tabs on the balance in the Plan.3 points -
Thank you Dave and Lois Baker and Colleagues
Dave Baker and one other reacted to imchipbrown for a topic
I was driven out by the (In)secure Act 2.0. I still lurk every day. It confirms my decision to hang up my ghosts. I got many a piece of good advice on these boards. Dave and Lois, you've provided an invaluable service and I'm eternally grateful for it.2 points -
Allocations Limited by 415
Luke Bailey and one other reacted to C. B. Zeller for a topic
I think you answered your own question. The plan clearly says that the allocation will be reduced so as not to violate 415. I would recommend changing the formula to individual allocation groups for the next plan year.2 points -
Thank you Dave and Lois Baker and Colleagues
Dave Baker and one other reacted to RatherBeGolfing for a topic
Enjoy retirement Andy! You have earned it! I will also echo the appreciation for Dave, Lois and this forum . It is such a great resource for this community and I always enjoy meeting my fellow benefitslinkers in the wild!2 points -
Thank you Dave and Lois Baker and Colleagues
Dave Baker and one other reacted to Bri for a topic
(And of course, thanks for leaving me a bunch of plans to have to take over on! đ)2 points -
Thank you Dave and Lois Baker and Colleagues
Luke Bailey and one other reacted to CuseFan for a topic
Congrats Andy, enjoy for yourself what you've spent a career helping others attain - I'm jealous!2 points -
QDRO after Alternate Payee's death before distributions began
Luke Bailey and one other reacted to CuseFan for a topic
Effen and Peter, as you see, provide excellent input and your subsequent attainment of the facts now give sense to the situation. The plan could certainly have allowed a life annuity with period certain for the AP and allow the AP to name a beneficiary for any remaining guaranteed payments after his death. The plan could not have provided for a survivor life annuity to AP's beneficiary (i.e., APs cannot elect a J&S with a new spouse or other beneficiary).2 points -
Thank you Dave and Lois Baker and Colleagues
Dave Baker and one other reacted to EPCRSGuru for a topic
Thank you, AndyH, and thanks for reminding us all to recognize the amazing resource that Dave and Lois Baker have created for all of us. As I have moved between HR and TDA and back again I have benefitted from BenefitsLink and especially the forums to refresh my memory or to get up-to-speed on a new facet of retirement administration. Best wishes, AndyH, on your retirement, and gratitude to the Dave and Lois!2 points -
QDRO after Alternate Payee's death before distributions began
Luke Bailey and one other reacted to Effen for a topic
A few things: 1) Doesn't really matter what the divorce decree says, it matters what the QDRO says. 2) Both participant and AP would have signed the QDRO to accept it (or at least their attorney did). Doesn't mean they understood it, but they should have. 3) Often, but not always, the APs share is based on the # years married / total years working * final benefit. Sometimes it is 50% of the benefit at the time of divorce. Depends on the wording in the QDRO. 4) She has a right to see a copy of their QDRO procedures. 5) The QDRO should have a specific section that address what happens if one of the parties die before benefits commencement. If it was a true "separate interest" QDRO, the APs share would just be forfeit if they died before commencement. If it was a pure "shared interest", the benefit reverts to the participant. Many are a blend of the two where they are shared until commencement, then they become separate. In those cases, if the AP dies before commencement, the benefit typically reverts to the participant. 6) Seems like the only way the AP's portion could be paid to someone other than the participant would be if it was a separate interest QDRO (since they are treated as 2 separate plan participants) and the plan had a death benefit for non-married participants. So, maybe a lump sum or a period certain annuity? Not logical that it would be a life annuity. 7) Easiest/cheapest thing is to read the QDRO. If she doesn't have it, request a copy from the Plan Administrator. She probably only needs to hire a lawyer if the PA isn't following the QDRO.2 points -
Thank you Dave and Lois Baker and Colleagues
Luke Bailey and one other reacted to Belgarath for a topic
Congratulations! And we'd like to extend this Laurel, and Hardy handshake (sorry, my so-called sense of humor again). I have appreciated your commentary over the years. As with all such announcements, I'm very jealous, but nevertheless I very sincerely wish you a very long, healthy, and happy retirement! Take care.2 points -
Thank you Dave and Lois Baker and Colleagues
Dave Baker and one other reacted to Peter Gulia for a topic
Amen!2 points -
Sole Prop - retro 401k set up
Luke Bailey reacted to Lou S. for a topic
I believe recent Notice 2024-2 clarifies that and is in agreement with your statement.1 point -
401k Plan terminated
Luke Bailey reacted to Paul I for a topic
kcarter430, as you may have surmised from Lou S.'s comments, the information used by the SSA is collected and maintained by processes that are not very controlled. If you know or think you have a benefit due, the place to start is with your own records. Some facts or documents you should gather include: Termination date from the company with the plan in which you participated (to set your time frame). Any participant statement reporting to you your account balance or accrued benefits in that plan before or after your termination date. If the amounts are significant to you or you are just curious, then you may decide to keep going. Otherwise, there is a high probability that the cost to you in time and effort is not worth pursuing this further. Next: Review any bank statements you may have for a few years starting from your termination date and going forward, looking for deposits that you do not recognize. Review any tax returns you may have for a few years starting from your termination day and going forward, looking for amounts reported on a Form 1099R or on the pension income line on the tax return. If you find deposits or reported pension income, then very likely you were paid and can put the issue to rest. Moving forward, here are some avenues to pursue: Look up the final Form 5500 filing for your plan here https://www.efast.dol.gov/5500search/ You should be able to find the filing for 2010 or possibly 2011. If the plan was subject to a plan audit, the audit report will be included in the download. The audit report may reveal information about the plan termination including if the account balances were rolled into the acquiring company or sent to an IRA provider. Make contact with these organizations and explain what you have done that led you to them. (They may or may not make an attempt to help.) Contact the National Registry of Unclaimed Retirement Benefits at https://unclaimedretirementbenefits.com/ - they exist to help people find money and it's free. Contact the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation at https://www.pbgc.gov/wr/find-unclaimed-retirement-benefits - they will search their records of terminated plans that sent them unclaimed benefits. They also have tips for people finding unclaimed benefits. Contact the Administration for Community Living at https://acl.gov/programs/retirement-planning-support/pension-counseling-and-information-program - this is a government funded group with a mission "AoAâs Pension Counseling and Information Program promotes the financial security of older individuals and enhances their independence by empowering them to make wise decisions with respect to pensions and savings plans. The program assists older Americans in accessing information about their retirement benefits and helps them to negotiate with former employers or pension plans for due compensation." May you have good luck and good fortune!1 point -
415 Limit Service
Luke Bailey reacted to C. B. Zeller for a topic
You said it is W-2 comp which implies this is a corporation. I'm going to assume S-corp, since that's more common for small businesses. I'm also assuming you (and your client) are aware of the issues with reasonable compensation for S-corp shareholder employees. If there was no passthrough income from the corp to the shareholder in those years then it's probably not an issue. Just to clarify, what was his comp for 2023? You wrote $300,000 in the first paragraph but used $330,000 for your calculation. I'll assume that $330,000 is correct and that $300,000 was a typo. Under the circumstances, I would have no problem including the pre-2023 years of service for 415. However I would include them for 415 comp as well. The comp limit is the high 3-year average comp prorated for less than 10 years of service. So his comp limit at 12/31/2023 is (0 + 0 + 330,000) / 36 months = 9,167 * .5 = 4,583.1 point -
Exceeded FSA Contribution Limit
Luke Bailey reacted to Brian Gilmore for a topic
If those contributions from the 12/29/23 payroll are attached to the 2024 plan year (i.e., available only for expenses incurred on or after 1/1/24), I think you could reasonably take the position that the contributions were not attributable to the 2023 plan year and therefore did not exceed the 2023 limit. Otherwise, the more conservative route would be to treat this as an excess contribution that's taxable in 2024 when refunded. IRS Notice 2012-40: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-12-40.pdf If a cafeteria plan timely complies with the written plan requirement limiting health FSA salary reduction contributions as set forth in section IV, below, but one or more employees are erroneously allowed to elect a salary reduction of more than $2,500 (as indexed for inflation) for a plan year, the cafeteria plan will continue to be a § 125 cafeteria plan for that plan year if (1) the terms of the plan apply uniformly to all participants (consistent with Prop. Treas. Reg. § 1.125-1(c)(1)); (2) the error results from a reasonable mistake by the employer (or the employerâs agent) and is not due to willful neglect by the employer (or the employerâs agent); and (3) salary reduction contributions in excess of $2,500 (as indexed for inflation) are paid to the employee and reported as wages for income tax withholding and employment tax purposes on the employeeâs Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement (or Form W-2c, Corrected Wage and Tax Statement) for the employeeâs taxable year in which, or with which, ends the cafeteria plan year in which the correction is made.1 point -
QDRO after Alternate Payee's death before distributions began
Luke Bailey reacted to Peter Gulia for a topic
Dianna912, if other efforts (including some Effen suggests) donât result in clarifying the participantâs benefit to her satisfaction, and you seek to help your friend evaluate her potential courses of action: Consider whether the circumstances you describe suggest enough potential for clarifying (and so improving) the participantâs benefit that it could be worthwhile to pay for at least an initial consultation with a knowledgeable employee-benefits lawyer. If the pension plan is ERISA-governed: One possible interpretation of ERISA § 206(d)(3) is that a qualified domestic relations orderâto the extent (if any) that an order may provide for a successor-in-interest to an original alternate payeeâmay so provide only if the order restricts such an alternate payee to a spouse, former spouse, child, or other dependent of the participant. (Iâm imagining that the deceasedâs nephew is not the participantâs dependent.) See, for example, In re Marriage of Janet D. & Gene T. Shelstead, 66 Cal. App. 4th 893, 78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 365, 22 Empl. Benefits Cas. (BL) 1906 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 15, 1998) (interpreting ERISA § 206(d)(3), and applying ERISA § 206(d)(3)(K)). But recognize that this decision is no precedent. One might use it in an effort to persuade a decision-makerâwhether the pension planâs administrator or a reviewing courtâthat an order is not a QDRO. A further possible interpretation of ERISA § 206(d)(3) is that a qualified domestic relations order cannot designate an alternate payeeâs successor-in-interest if, under the pension planâs provisions, a participant cannot designate the participantâs successor-in-interest. That also might be so if there is no remaining interest to dispose of after the relevant personâs death. Recognize that the pension planâs provisions might matter greatly. Consider that the participant might use the pension planâs DRO and claims procedures to question the administratorâs interpretation, and to request the participantâs interpretation. (Some courts might say one must exhaust the planâs procedures before asking a court to declare that a domestic-relations courtâs order is not a QDRO.) Using the planâs internal procedures might be less burdensome than litigation in a Federal court. None of this is legal advice to anyone.1 point -
Thank you Dave and Lois Baker and Colleagues
Luke Bailey reacted to Lois Baker for a topic
Congratulations on your retirement! Best wishes for fair winds and following seas in the years ahead. And thank YOU for the kind words, as well as for all of your contributions to these Boards over the years -- we're honored to have been part of your journey.1 point -
Special Tax Notice
Lou S. reacted to austin3515 for a topic
That;s impressive. The notice we have been using is 4 pages combined, and the font looks like 8pt!1 point -
Special Tax Notice
Lou S. reacted to david rigby for a topic
Pretty simple to take the IRS version and cut out the parts you don't need (for example, if the Plan has no Roth accounts). In my experience, the only thing I customize is the plan name. Easy peasy.1 point
