Does a plan operating as a safe harbor (3% non-elective) lose its' safe harbor status if it also provides a match formula of 40% match on deferrals up to 10% compensation.

I know there have been some prior posts about this including reference to an old article (say around 2000 or 2001) entitled Pros and Cons of the the VFCP. I was wondering if anybody could correct me to a more recent article or checklist that one might use as a decision tool here. Have a 401(k) plan that failed to timely submit all 401(k) deferrals at the same time due to record transfer error. The failure resulted in a small amount of deferrals ($5,000) being a few days late last fall during which time general market incurred significant loss. Accordingly, we would expect loss, if any, to participants as a result to be very small. Willing to make up lost interest amounts, etc. but is it really worth going through VFCP filing?

Hi there, I tried to search but couldnt come up with anything (that I thought) that could help.

I pretty much need a worksheet kind of thing to work out just how a company can give their key emps more inan hsa than other emps.

thanks

Does anyone know if a Plan must obtain a new (presumably additional) EIN when it adds Roth deferrals?

Plan recently terminated and paid out all participants save one. The lone holdout is actually a participant who died several years ago. There is no beneficiary designation and the participant's estate was not probated. The Plan sponsor has tried to find heirs to the participant with no luck. The participant's account is in the range of $400. What can the Plan Sponsor do?

We have a self insured medical plan. We have a schedule A for the stop loss, do we file this with the 5500? The stop loss is between the carrier and the insurer not the plan.

Does a 403(b) plan run by a non profit have to comply with Non Discrimination Tests? I assume in the past no, but for 2009 with the new regs will it change? TIA

Can new loans be eliminated from a plan, prospectively? If so, is a 204(h) Notice required ahead of time? What would you do about existing loans?

Thanks in advance for any help.

We inherited a DB plan with Life Insurance. This plan is sponsored by a small corporation with 10 participants.

The Death Benefit under the plan is the greater of Insurance proceeds less cash value or the present value of accrued benefits.

The document indicates the face amount of policies shall be 100 times the anticipated monthly benefit. With an on-going plan the face amount for each participant is their projected monthly benefit X 100. Does anything change if the plan is frozen? In this case there were 2 new entrants in 2008 who accrued benefits. The plan was then frozen 1/1/2009. Must policies be based on their projected benefits even though the plan is frozen?

The goal here is to make sure all participants have the proper amount of insurance.

Speaking of the proper amount of insurance, the 100% owner of the corp (and only key employee) only has insurance of about 50 times his monthly benefit. Could he waive (in writing) the remaining amount that the plan would ordinarily purchase for him?

A new-to-us client has maintained a plan that dates back to 1981. It has never received a determination letter from the IRS. Originally, it was a money purchase pension plan.

Apparently, no TEFRA/DEFRA/REA amendment was timely made. This was discovered in the early 1990s, as part of the TRA '86 restatement process.

I'm assuming that in that pre-EPCRS era, the provider did not have the option of a plan document failure fix with minor penalty as there now is. It appears that provider simply restated the plan as a standardized money purchase pension plan in the early 1990s to give the plan reliance on that provider's standardized prototype notification letter, per Rev Proc 89-13, section 11.02.

Shortly thereafter, the plan was restated again, but this time as a standardized profit sharing plan. Again, reliance on provider's notification letter from the IRS. (This followed so closely on the heels of the restatement to the standardized money purchase pension plan that it appears that step may merely have been made by the prior provider to lay claim to Rev Proc 89-13, section 11.02 reliance.)

The plan was timely restated for GUST. Yet again, reliance on provider's notification letter from the IRS.

The employer recently hired our firm to restate for EGTRRA. The plan design changes now wanted require that the prototype used be in the non-standardized form.

If we prepare an IRS Form 5307 application, from which notification letter would we have to provide later documents? or would it be from plan inception?

The argument for the TRA '86 notification letter is that if a determination letter application (Form 5307) had been made in the later 1990s, that TRA '86 notification letter and adoption agreement (and amendment in the interim until the application was made) was all that would then have been required.

The argument for documents from plan inception is that beginning with the GUST restatements, reliance on adoption of a standardized prototype's notification letter did not count as the most recent determination letter for the plan.

Or, would it simply be better to prepare a document failure VCP application at the same time as now making a determination letter application?

So, it's a sunny Saturday afternoon and I've got nothing better to do but look at RP-2000 q's, projected to 2008. For the ages from 54 to 61, the girls are dying faster than the boys.

Anybody ever notice this? Does this make sense?

An employer with 8000+ lives wants to expand the list of potential recipients for its DB RFP that will include actuarial, admin, investment consulting, legal&compliance, domestic and international plans. Aside from the "big name players" can anyone recommend a boutique-type firm that might be able to provide services to support a DB plan that is complicated due to an extensive legacy plan/grandfathered benefit scenario? Client is located in the NYC metro area.

Are they many out there electronically filing the Form 5500, etc using EFAST? We have not tried it yet. It's not required until the plan year beginning in 2010 (or it is 2009?) but I was wondering if has been a time consuming process. Some clients, especially small ones, like to receive the forms in the mail, sign it, mail it and not have to deal with applying for an e-signature.

We use Relius to generate our Form 5500's.

Also, how about attachments. How are the attachments sent with the filing?

Does anyone know what subsequent law increased the $1,750 cash out amount under Reg. Section 1.401(a)-(11)(a)(2) to $5,000?

If an Enrolled Actuary issues Statements of Actuarial Opinion on ERISA plans as well post-retirement medical benefits, it looks to me like he/she must meet the new Qualification Standards, that is, 24 hours of credit for 2008, 30 for each year after 2008, and does not qualify for the EA exemption. Is that correct?? If not, what are the current qualifcation standards for such an EA? Thank you.

I have a QDRO that states that the alt. payee is to receive a flat dollar amount, based on the partic. account balance from two years ago.

Up until the date of transfer, the QDRO states to add in any gains and minus any losses, but only gains and losses associated with the flat dollar amount to receive.

Here is what I know:

Partic. Beginning balance 6/9/07 $75,000.00

Alternate payee portion $27,000.00

Partic. remaining portion $48,000.00

Partic. cont's 6/9/07 - current day $20,000.00

Net G/L 6/9/07 - current day ($21,000.00)

Ending acct. balance $74,000.00

Does anyone know of a QDRO calculator on the web that could help me determine what portion of the ($21,000) loss is attributable only to the alt. payee's $27,000 to receive?

I've looked at this a couple ways - one, treating it as if alt. payee's portion were an ADP refund. Another way was this calculation:

Partic. Balance portion after split $48,000.00

Partic. Cont's 6/9/07 - current day $20,000.00

Sum $68,000.00 Dollars from the participant that make-up the ending balance.

This sum / ending acct bal. = 91.89% 68,000 / 74,000

91.89% of net G/L = ($19,297.30) Partic's share in G/L 91.89% * (21,000.00)

Alternate payee G/L portion = ($1,702.70)

Plan uses Safe Harbor for Hardships.

Plan does not allow for loans.

Participant is building a new home and has a construction loan.

Current home is not selling (surprise - we live in MI)

He now is defaulting on the construction loan and wants a hardship.

Any ideas as to whether this fits under purchase of a principal residence or forclosure ?

Thanks

Pat

Is an employer-provided group life insurance policy considered an ERISA employee benefit for which an SPD is required?

Greetings,

I was wondering if anyone else has run into this problem yet.

I have a leveraged ESOP that just became leveraged in 2007. So, its two years into its loan. For 2008, the value of the stock dropped over 20%. Now, if you look at the net assets of the plan, the value of the plan is negative.

My question is how do I report this on the 5500? Is it ok to have a negative value? Do I leave the Schedule I out of balance?

Any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

I know this may have been asked before, but would appreciate any help.

I am doing a retirement calculation for a rehiree.

She termed in 1997 and took a lumpsum payment. Was rehired in 2000 and is now retiring.

The benefit is based on high 3 years of compensation.

Can I use the compensation prior to rehire date in order to compute the average comp?

The plan document has no clear guidelines on the said matter.