Leaderboard

That's correct. The combined deduction limit doesn't apply if the DB plan is covered by PBGC. IRC 404(a)(7)(C)(iv)

I would like to chime in. Participants actual account balance is the sum of the actual assets in his account plus the value of the outstanding loan. Assets remaining after the loan - $25,000 Outstanding loan - $25,000 His account balance is $50,000 50% of this is $25,000 Less outstanding loan of $25,000 Remaining loan available is $0 You need to remember to add back in the loan since it is part of his account value before you determine the 50% of vested balance. Unless the asset value drops from the original time you took the loan, you should never get a negative answer.

As someone who's primary job is to process conversions (money only, not addressing plan provisions or payroll), I can tell you that an in-kind transfer is much more difficult than a liquidation and wire. To speak to the comments above, if the money is insurance company separate accounts or omnibus accounts, an in-kind transfer is not possible. You would really only be able to move from one custodian to another where the funds are invested at the plan level. Arranging for an in-kind transfer as of a specific date takes a lot of coordination and agreement between the custodians, recordkeepers and the funds themselves and all must agree to the same schedule, and there will be lots of paperwork involved. Do you have a copy of the conversion records that Guideline originally sent over? You may want to look at those records to see for yourself if they had the information necessary. For example, did the records include the full name, Social Security Number and amount by source and fund by participant that was transferred? Also, did Guideline provide a report by participant with a beginning balance for the year, contributions, distributions, earnings, fees, loan data, and transfer out, etc.? Did they provide any census data? Did you map over the funds, or did they invest as per new enrollment allocations (or QDIA)? Mapping adds another layer of complexity, especially if fund data was not provided at the participant level. There are some recordkeepers who use their own identifiers and don't provide Social Security Numbers, which can make the conversion process difficult. Also, receiving the data for the current year doesn't always happen. I often have to make several requests to get current year data or end up getting several files with pieces of data and have to try to rebuild the year with what data I did receive (which I prefer NOT to do). If you ever do a conversion again, I would ask for sample copies of the records that are going to be sent over and ask to be cc:d in any communications between the recordkeepers so you can see what information is and is not being provided and when. Ultimately, if you are the Plan Fiduciary, all responsibility lands on you, so being very involved it the conversion process would be advisable.

On Santo Gold’s hypo, isn’t the account balance after the first loan is made still $50,000—that is, $25,000 participant loan receivable + $25,000 other investments? But wouldn’t ERISA § 408(b)(1) and Internal Revenue Code § 72(p)(2)(A) limit the amount for a second loan? Consider 29 C.F.R. § 2550.408b-1(f)(2)(i) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-29/section-2550.408b-1. Consider 26 C.F.R. § 1.72(p)-1/Q&A-20 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-26/section-1.72(p)-1. Even before applying the tax Code limits, ERISA § 408(b)(1) limits the outstanding balance of all loans to the participant to more than half the participant’s vested account (measured after the origination of each loan). On Santo Gold’s hypo, if the participant when applying for a second loan has not yet repaid anything on the first loan, isn’t the second loan $0?

Your math and logic is all wrong. Read the IRS examples: https://links.us1.defend.egress.com/Warning?crId=6984f4a2c933bcd338c721dd&Domain=oneblueridge.com&Threat=eNpzrShJLcpLzAEADmkDRA%3D%3D&Lang=en&Base64Url=eNrLKCkpKLbS1y9JTcwt1svNTC7KL85PK9FLzs_Vz01NLdE3MrE0s7AwMbe0tDA3M7IvsA21zEsvrfIrzM4M8CrLyvIMzQYALWcXFw%3D%3D&@OriginalLink=teams.microsoft.com

The time to negotiate provisions about a recordkeeper’s conversion-out is before the plan’s responsible plan fiduciary makes a service agreement with the recordkeeper the plan later might want to leave. The time to negotiate provisions about a recordkeeper’s conversion-in is before the plan’s responsible plan fiduciary makes the service agreement with the recordkeeper that would, if engaged, process the conversion-in. For many plans, either observation is impractical because a plan might lack bargaining power. Beyond whatever service obligations a plan might get, a transition from one recordkeeper to another calls for not only caring work from every service provider but also strong and sustained oversight and supervision from the plan’s responsible plan fiduciary. Each recordkeeper might, to supplement the plan fiduciary’s attention, appeal to the other recordkeeper’s sense of business decency and fair dealing. A mature recordkeeper might work to get and keep a good reputation as both a graceful loser and an accommodating winner. Bill Presson is right that—at least regarding mutual fund shares, collective trust fund units, and insurance company separate account units (forms of investment designed for redemptions)—a transfer of property other than a payment of money is unusual.

Just to add to what Paul said - you will never get an in-kind transfer from one RK to another. All the shares are held in omnibus accounts.

Onboarding a plan requires attention to extremely granular detail that is customized to the plan provisions, the deconversion processes of the existing service providers including potentially the recordkeeper, TPA and investment firms, the client's internal administrative support including payroll, HR systems, and funding procedures, and to the you as the new service provider including everything needed to provide continuity of the rights and privileges of all of the plan participants. Coordinating all of this commonly takes 10-12 weeks, and starts with working out a detailed work plan in the first few weeks with all of the parties involved. The time for asking your questions is at the beginning of the conversion process and the people you need to ask are the client and the existing service providers.

Peter lays out the basis for arguing that the plans were closed out in 2025, and makes it clear that this is solely the plan's fiduciaries' (read client's) decision. I expect most practitioners would say don't sweat the $0.50 for Plan 1 and writing off the $0.50 with no adjustment to the 1099R, most would say it is really pushing it where the amount is $3,500 that was not closed out until 31 days after the end of the plan year. From the perspective of a service provider, I would explain to the client that it is their decision to make and their fiduciary responsibility and accountability for the consequences of their decision (unless you are a 3(16) provider). I would let the client know I disagree with the Advisor and I only would be willing to prepare a final filing for 2026 along with a 1099R for the residual payment. If the client chooses to follow the Advisor's "promise", then the Advisor can help the client find someone who is willing to close out everything for 2025. The plans are closing so there is no future work for you on those plans. If your relationship with the client is ongoing, keep in mind that if the client chooses to follow the Advisor's advice over yours, that says something about the relative value of your relationship to the client. This is also true about any relationship you may have with the Advisor.