Leaderboard

I hope you all have a great Thanksgiving, unsullied by productive thought. (We are having our meal on Saturday, as many family members can't make it tomorrow, so I'll be working tomorrow - great time to catch up on stuff with no phone/e-mails!)

Happy Thanksgiving to all my BenefitsLink cohorts! We’re closed for the week (but I did help a few clients with some amendments—don’t tell on me), so this is a week to recharge. Hope everyone enjoys family, food, and football!

Happy Thanksgiving everyone! I hope you all get to enjoy time with family, a good meal, and of course, some football! I'm not working tomorrow, but we have a lot of people out on Friday so that is my day to catch up on stuff without too much interruption.

I'm frequently surprised at the litany of reasons why some people may not want to be found (or accept payment). Divorce, separation, child support, legal or illegal debt, avoiding a stalker, it goes on and on... we had one where the former employee was collecting disability, and getting a payment from the plan would have reduced or eliminated her disability payment. It'll probably get worse now with the ICE crackdowns.

No. If initial eligibility is satisfied for 3% SHNE and someone enters the plan they get the 3% SHNE for however long they were employed and in the plan, whether a day, a week or through year-end.

We work with an outstanding service provider who services Southeastern Pennsylvania. If you are in this geographic ares, I can send you their contact information. Based on experience, I recommend in making your decision you consider the breadth and depth of a provider's technical support (in particular responsiveness), security (including availability of full encryption of all transmissions of email, data and storage), access to leading state-of-the-art technology, and cross-platform support (including computing, phone service, operating systems and hardware). The cost of these services almost always is higher than one would guess, but that often is because the outstanding providers provide more value for what most people don't even know they need. Consider documenting what services you will be providing to your clients over the next 2-3 months, and seeing if there is a way to deliver those services without compromising the integrity of clients' data, and be prepared to discuss with a successor provider strategies to get support through a transition period. In our business, we have an obligation to protect the information entrusted to us.

Sure (although those do help keep the lights on around here ...). Two methods, depending on how you use your feed: Method 1: Create a custom Activity Stream (cleanest) Go to Activity > My Activity Streams > Create New Stream. Under Content Types, select what you want (usually Topics/Posts). Scroll to Forums and uncheck the forum(s) you want to hide. Save the stream. Click the star to make it your default stream. This becomes your personal feed; the excluded forum will never appear. Method 2: Clone the default “Unread Content” stream Open Activity > Unread Content. Click Show Filters. Under Forums, uncheck the forum to hide. Click Save as New Stream. Name it (e.g., “Unread – No Jobs”). Star it as default.

Speculating but if you filed PBGC premiums and not a 5500 that might trigger a response from the PBGC but I don't know for sure. You could discuss with your client reaching out the PBGC directly with a copy of the e-mail asking the PBGC to verify the authenticity. If it is from the PBGC, and there are no missed MRCs you could let the PBGC know their information is incorrect. If there actually are missed MRCs, you could file the required Form 10(s). But if there are also still missing 5500s, the plan may have some additional issues to fix.

Hi, 2017-56 states that one of the three asset valuation method changes automatedly approved is: (2) A change in asset valuation method to a method that determines the value of plan assets as the average of the fair market value on the valuation date and the adjusted fair market value of assets determined for one or more earlier determination dates, as described in § 430(g)(3)(B) and the regulations and other published guidance thereunder. (See § 1.430(g)1(c)(2) and Notice 2009-22, 2009-14 I.R.B. 741.) The asset value determined under the method must be restricted so that it is not greater than 110% and not less than 90% of the fair market value, as described in § 1.430(g)-1(c)(2)(iii). Based on the above, a change to using a 3 year average as the value of the assets for the val (ie a 3 year average calculated based on the fair market value of the assets as of the current val date plus the prior two years fair value of the assets) would be automatically approved? Thank you.

C.B. Zeller, thank you very much and thank you for the heads up regarding 2009-22. This plan does not make contributions and the average will not need to take into account the contributions. Thank you. Your time and insight is much appreciated.