Highway Bill appears to reduce required contributions so that employers will have -- at least temporarily -- the wherewithal to pay increased PBGC premiums. We must continue to count our blessings that Congress is unable to legislate changes in the Law of Gravity !!!

I have a multiple employer plan. Entity is a participating employer. Entity ceased existence in February 2011. New Entity was formed. New Entity is not a participating employer and not controlled with Entity sponsoring the plan. Employees in New Entity contributed 401(k) deferrals to plan. Employees who deferred were previously employees in old entitity that was a participating employer. Are the new entities 401(k) deferrals allowed in plan, since not controlled and not a participating employer?

There were three Indian squaws. One slept on a deerskin, one slept on an elk skin and the third slept on a hippopotamus skin. All three became pregnant and the first two each had a baby boy. The one who slept on the hippopotamus skin had twin boys. This goes to prove that the squaw of the hippopotamus is equal to the sons of the squaws of the other two hides.

I have a small business where there are 3 HCEs, 2 of the HCEs max out their PS contributions at $49,000 (now $50K) and one of them is of retirement age. There is other NHCE staff who are also participants in the plan. The other HCE is younger and does not want his 25% contribution in the profit sharing plan if possible. He'd rather any profit sharing contribution in cash. There is no salary deferral component. What are some plan design ideas that could suit this company's needs?

Would you consider a non-qualified deferred comp plan? Use an insurance policy? Any input would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

If a company is winding down, and the owner terminates all employees except himself and distributes all accounts except his own from a profit sharing plan, when does the plan become a one-participant plan eligible to file Form 5500EZ, if ever? Can he file a Form 5500EZ in the year all other participants are paid out, because at the end of the year it meets all of the requirements of a one-participant plan? I want to file an EZ, because the only remaining assets are disqualified assets and he doesn't have a large enough bond to cover, so he would have to have an audit.

Does anyone know of any resources for information concerning contribution and withdrawal liability levels when a plan becomes insolvent and PBGC provides financial assistance (in the form of a loan)? Specifically:

1. Obviously, when a plan is insolvent it is in very poor financial shape. Do contribution obligations tend to increase where a plan becomes insolvent? I don't believe the trustees would have the power to unilaterally increase contributions without the bargaining parties' consent, except as maybe provided in a rehabilitation plan.

2. If a plan becomes insolvent, the plan's unfunded liability is reduced because benefits are reduced to the maximum guaranteed amount. What is the general effect on withdrawal liability, and does this serve to encourage bargaining parties to remain in the plan?

Any thoughts are welcome. Thanks.

I have a client that has a former owner (50%) still paid via K-1. They say he is a "contract" partner, and shares no part of capital nor profits.

Would I consider this person a former key?

Can/should he be paid on a K-1? The K instructions say its for people who share in the profits or the capital.

A new twist for me. A Plan is Safe harbor for Hardship. An employee wants to move. He has an FHA loan on the house he is trying to sell. To get a FHA loan on the house he wants to buy now, he needs to pay off the old FHA loan. Can he take a hardship dist to pay off old loan and enough for a new downpayment?

In case anyone cares. Individual mandate upheld. Only details I know are that it was a 5-4 decision, with Kennedy voting against upholding, and Roberts voting to uphold.

Don't know if they struck down any other part of it. I'm sure there will be lots of analysis in the days and weeks ahead!

Can you someone help me clarify the vesting for one of our participants. Plan uses "elapsed time" for eligibility and vesting. One year service requirement from Anniversary Date, entry dates on 4/1 amd 10/1

Date of Hire - 9/6/2008

Date of term - 5/16/12

I would think he has 3 years of service? But I am not sure.

Only 2 of the years he worked did he have over 1,000 but hours have nothing to do with his vesting. Correct?

A NONPROFIT corporation operates a physician practice group. It provides physicians with a standard employment agreemnent which provides for severance payouts upon death, disability or ANY termination of employment (voluntary or involuntary), as long as the physician had at least 3 years of service at the time of such event. The severance is equal to the net collections the corporation receives from the physicians' services performed prior to termination during the 90-days following such termination. The severance is payable monthly in arrears, based on actual collections received for the preceding calendar month, and the first payment is made during the second calendar month after termination.

Query: Because the severance right is available upon a voluntary termination of employment, it will vest once the physician hits 3 years of employment. So, due to the corporation's nonprofit status, won't the deferred compensation be taxable at that point in time? And, if so, what is the amount that's taxable, as the post-termination collections won't be known at such time?

Thoughts? And thanks.

Help - I am in need of E & O for my firm. Every carrier I call seems to have no clue what I am talking about because I do not invest. We are just a straight TPA Firm, you know, plan design, admin, implementation, forms.... Can anyone send me some info or give me a company quickly. Thank You.

My employer is a company which is the "offspring" of two merged companies which over the years had purchased and merged many smaller companies. These smaller companies had their own plans (ESOPs, Savings, Defined Benefit...the whole array) which they maintained for quite sometime after being acquired. At some point many of these plans were merged with the larger parent companies plans.

Upon the merger of the parent companies the two companies DC plans were merged while the companies each maintain a DB plan. The long and short of the situation is that I receive a number of letters from people who receive SSA notices informing that they may entitled to a benefit under Plan xxxxx. The reality is that anybody who is entitled to a benefit through the employer is either a participant in one of the two DB plans or the DC plan. Extensive clean-up has been conducted on the DB Plans and the Company is highly confident that all participants entitled to a benefit have been identified. On the DC side, the records have resided with a record keeper/trustee for over 20 years and so there is no issue with identifying participants entitled to benefits under the plans (unless one of the former record keepers has funds floating around in space--which they don't).

We want to clean up all SSA's attributable to the current plans and former plans. However, as is so often the case, the smaller company's did not keep good records of filings (if they filed at all) and, because this dates back to 1984--pre widespread use of electronic record keeping--there's just no way to find out who was reported as an "A" at some point and whether they were subsequently reported as a "D" upon commencement or payout of benefits.

Does anybody know if the IRS will provide a list of who their records show, by Plan number, as possibly being owed a benefit under these various plans (as in who was an "A" but never a "D" as there are no participants in these terminated/merged plans there are no participants owed a benefit).

i picked up a plan and the formula is 100% AMC pro rata participation.

only owner in plan, though not a safe harbor formula

owner AMC is 20,000 per month

owner has 5 years participation and will have 15 at NRA

valuation computed AB as 16,250 * 5/15 = 5,417.

well i dont have a problem with the above and pre PPA with a funding mehtod using projected benefit I would think the above projected ben of 16,250 (415 limit) is required.

Now post PPA we live in the world of the AB.

It seems acceptable for AB to be = 20,000 * (5/15) = 6,667, as 415 limit after 5 years participation is 8,125, so no problem.

Opinions re: the pro rata of 20,000?

plan provides that AB is the ret ben participant would receive at normal ret multiplied by participation/part at NRA.

thanks

Employer sponsors a Profit Sharing plan with comp/comp allocation formula. No last day or 1000 hour rule for contribution allocation. The employer has been funding the plan each month, but now cannot continue to fund due to financial issues. The HCEs have already earned more than $250K each, so if they don't freeze compensation as of June, they will not have money to fund the additional contribution needed to true up the NHCEs at end of year. If we freeze, however, is the 401(a)(17) limit prorated as it would be in a terminated plan?

Suppose you have a small profit sharing plan with 10 participants. 5 are full time and 5 are part time (under 1,000 hrs).

The plan allows all employees to be eligible upon being hired. In the past, profit sharing contributions were provided to all employees (full and part time).

They now want to amend the plan to be a 401(k) plan and require 1 year of service of 1,000 hrs for all sources. They also want the plan to have a safe harbor match and only want to provide the safe harbor match from now on.

Since the 5 part time employees have never worked 1,000 hours, they would not have met the eligibility requirements for the new salary deferrals and safe harbor match.

I believe rev. ruling 2004-13 also indicates that a safe harbor match would make a plan exempt from the top heavy minimum as long as no employer contribution (other than the safe harbor match) is funded for the year. Also this determination is made on a year by year basis.

It appears that in this case, the part time employees will not be able to make salary deferrals, receive a safe harbor match or receive a 3% top heavy minimum.

Does anyone agree / disagree?

Anyone know whether exchange traded funds can constitute qualified replacement property under 1042?

Can a PRA participant, who has terminated employment, use up the balance of her PRA by paying for future months of health plan coverage? Termination date: 6/8/2012, Premium is covering July, Aug, Sept, 2012.

Proof of the premium payment has been submitted, but I'm thinking that because the coverage is not for June or any other prior month, it is not a reimburseable expense for this Participant.

I have been reading EBIA and other reference articles, but haven't come across specific rules for PRA!

If anyone has some direct references for me, I would be so grateful!!!

Thanks much,

CJL

Although Cash Balance is technically in the DB realm, on SSA - is the balance for a reportable participant shown as DC the instructions on the for for item (f) Part III note only indicating Defined Benefit plan - periodic payment - I'd report in column (g) - DC plan - total value of account and provide current cash balance... agreement?

This was in the M&A forum, though I've reposted here as well:

"QUOTE (Rider @ Feb 15 2011, 02:52 PM)

Plan 1 has a safe harbor match of 100% on 1st 4%.

Plan 2 has a safe harbor match of 100% on first 3%, plus 50% on next 2%.

They want to merge plan 1 in to plan 2 mid-year.

Seems to me they may have to wait until the end of the year or it will invoke testing?"

I have the same issue, in an M&A situation. In my case Plan 1 has a match of 100% on 1st 5%. Surviving plan would have the richer match.

IRS stated that amendments to safe harbor plans to add Roth and hardship withdrawals are allowed, but no more. I have also seen that IRS representatives have said that a safe harbor and non-safe harbor plan cannot merge mid-year lest the safe harbor be affected.

However, I've seen nothing regarding merging two safe harbor plans mid-year. If you have two safe harbor plans pre-merger and a safe harbor plan post-merger, with no reductions in benefit levels, then what's the beef? If it's not allowed, then the primary impact in this case would be that those in the less rich plan will have to wait longer to get the richer match.

Has anyone seen any informal commentary on merging two safe harbor plans? Thanks in advance.