I'm new to the Taft-Hartley plan world, so any help would be appreciated!

Can a welfare fund accept employer contributions for both welfare and profit sharing benefits for "away" employees and then reciprocate the money back to the "home" locals for allocation between that local's welfare and profit sharing funds? For example, assume under the "away" contract that an employer must contribute $2 for profit sharing and $1 for welfare benefits. Can the welfare fund alone hold the $3 and then cut a check to the home local for $3 and have them allocate the money to their welfare and profit sharing plans?

Has anyone heard of this? I think it is a lump sum option under the state's DB plan, however not sure if it requires a lump sum service credit transfer from the 403b plan to the state DB plan in order to pay out this partial lump sum?

Thanks

I have a cross tested plan with 5 groups. The profit sharing contribution is allocated on 414s comp, which is compensation paid for hours worked. It does not included bonus, overtime, vacation or sick pay. The gateway test has to pass the 5% test and I am using 415 compensation. One of the groups receives 5% of their 414s compensation. This group is failing gateway.

To correct the test, can I give each employee the addtional amount needed to get them to 5% of 415 comp? Which would mean each employee would receive a different percentage, it would not be pro-rata?

and in this group there are highly compensated employees. Since they are HCEs, do they have to receive an additional amount to get to 5% of 415 comp? I'm thinking no, since they are hces. But since they are part of a group, I wasn't sure if I had to treat everyone in the group the same.

thanks for your help.

We have a multiple employer plan (8 employers) converting to our recordkeeping services. Each employer has different provisions for their specific plan so for administrative ease we are suggesting they spin-off from that plan and set up 8 separate plans on our system. Per my research, this seems to be allowed and will not be considered a successor plan. However, the multiple employer plan will no longer exist and in effect will terminate so I have this nagging question on whether or not all of the adopting employers of the multiple employer plan will indeed be able to spin-off without forming successor plans. The plan sponsor of the multiple employer plan is not going out of business.

In addition, the plan sponsor of the multiple employer plan will be instituting a "start-up" plan with us for any new employers that decide to join the plan. Going forward the employers will need to stick to the provisions of the multiple employer plan we are drafting or will need to adopt a separate plan, again for administrative ease. Because it is only for new employers and will not affect anyone that was already in the plan I think this would be OK as well.

Any thoughts?

If I used segment rates for the 2008 valuation and the yield curve for the 2009, is that a change in my assumptions or my method?

I am thinking that if I change the lookback month for the segment rates that could be an assumption change, but for some reason I'm thinking that a change to/from segment rates from/to yield curve is a method change.

Is there anything "official" on this?

I have been trying to pin down a firm answer as to the bonding requirements for 403(b) plans. What I have gathered is that 403(b) plans that are solely voluntary elective deferrals are not subjct to the ERISA bond requirements. However, I can't find confirmation that 403(b) plans with employer contributions (either match or nonelective) need to acquire a bond (I am not referring to church or governmental plans).

Does anyone have any clarification? Any help would be appreciated

Thanks

HCE who is not an owner or family member of an owner.

Is the spouse or dependent of such an HCE also an HCE?

Thank you.

We have a DB plan where the asset is an annuity. The plan in terminating and they just want to reregister the annuity into the participants name. The insurance company says this is not a taxable event. I would think that it is - because it is changing ownership from the Plan name to the participants name. It is NOT going to an IRA. This doesnt qualify for a 1035 exchange - correct?

Thanks

Is this the GENERAL procedure for calculating withdrawal liability: (1) withdrawal liabiilty determined under a method provided in ERISA Section 4211 (this is the actual W/L amount); (2) That amount is amortized over a number of years in accordance with ERISA Section 4219.

It seems to me that an employer wanting to pay W/L in a lump sum payment would pay the amount that is determined under Section 4211. There would not be any type of discount for paying in a lump sum payment. Is this correct? Please let me know if you know of any cases/PBGC opininons, etc., that discuss lump sum withdrawal liabiilty payments. Thanks.

Hello to all-

Is the service provider allowed to register and obtain a plan sponsor/administrator's filing signer credentials and then prepare, sign and submit the form 5500-SF using those credentials on behalf of the plan sponsor/administrator? My firm has instructed the plan managers to do this following the recent additional e-signature option. We would be using the plan sponsor/administrator's name & email address. Everything I've read indicates this is strictly prohibited.

Thanks!

My client called with the following question this morning: A distribution due to death was processed from a deceased participant account to his primary beneficiary. Prior to taking any action on the account the primary beneficiary also passed away. The client doesn't have any beneficiary designation on file for the primary bene. Would the money go to the spouse of the deceased beneficiary or would the money be transferred to the secondary beneficiary of the deceased participant?

Does anyone know if the Plan can limit the AP to less than 18 months for getting the DRO qualified before it distributes funds to the participant?

I am an AP. One plan told me they would give me only 1 month to get the DRO signed by a judge and then would not protect my interest in the Plan after that unless I kept renewing my request monthly for up to 3 months. I am concerned because the court process can take months especially in a contested situation.

I also asked them for their written QDRO rules and the contact person at the Plan wrote me a letter that listed their requirements for a QDRO. Is this sufficient? Aren't they required to have formal written QDRO procedures on file with the DOL?

Also, what does it mean that "any determination that an order is a QDRO that is made after the close of the 18-month period is to be applied prospectively only?"

When does the 18 month period start to run?

Employer is Self Employed and has 2 employees.

Employer does not provide health insurance.

Employer increased wages for 2 employees in order to assist them with purchasing their own policies.

Employer purchases his own policy but has the company pay for his premiums only.

In addition, he takes a credit on his Form 1040.

Is this allowed or is this discrimation?

Employer is Self Employed and has 2 employees.

Employer does not provide health insurance.

Employer increased wages for 2 employees in order to assist them with purchasing their own policies.

Employer purchases his own policy but has the company pay for his premiums only.

In addition, he takes a credit on his Form 1040.

Is this allowed or is this discrimation?

In determining when a rehab plan default schedule may be involuntarily imposed, do we disregard extensions of the CBA after the plan has entered into critical status? I believe the reference in 432 is to the natural expiration date.

A plan sponsor assumed a participant would be terminated as of 4/1/2010. On 4/1/2010 the participant submitted distribution paperwork to take a direct payment of the funds. Taxes were withheld, distribution was processed as normal.

Turns out, the employee never terminated... So, now we (the TPA) are trying to figure out what to do. Here is my assumption:

Participant writes a check to the plan for the full taxable amount of the distribution (including the 20% withheld). A 1099 would be issued with a tax withholding amount (20% of the distribution amt), but $0.00 under taxable amount and distribution amount. This way he would be able to deduct the withheld amount, but not be taxed for a distribution.

Is this just "the easy way" of fixing this (thus, making it the wrong way)? We suspect it will be difficult if not impossible to get the withholding amount back from the IRS.

This is very odd. I have a client who's three docs have decided not to fund their Safe Harbor match true-up amounts. They have contributed the full Safe Harbor match to all NHCEs. Can they do this? Part of their Safe Harbor match has been contributed....it's just the true-up that they do not want to fund.

thanks for all comments on this.

A couple are married and have no children.

Each have a HDHP with individual coverage through their employers.

Each have their own HSA.

Can each deposit up to $3,050 for 2010?

since they file a joint return, does that make them subject to the "family" limit of $6,150?

Not sure what their limits would be?

The LRM to my knowledge are just suggested plan language that the IRS will approve in many cases when reviewing a plan. But they are not mandatory or actual law or regulations.

Is that correct?

Thanks

How are TPA's and document providers handling loan policies in a multi vendor and product environment? For example you could have a plan that has a 403b1 annuity and b7 custodial account with one provider, and then contracts, some active some inactive, with multiple vendors, and all allow 2 or 3 loans. Does the plan document then defer to the underlying contract, or are you actually creating a loan policy with each contract's provisions stated therein - number of loans, interest rate, repayment provisions, sources - they could all differ among contracts!

The written plan document under the final 403b regs is making this a challenge!