I figured this question would have been asked here before, but I couldn't find it so here goes. Do you think Rev. Rul. 79-237 still applies in this post-PPA environment and NC and amortization payments are pro rated through the plan termination date?

Dumb question...I've got a 401(k) plan that's changing its name. Do we file something with the DOL so that its not looking for a 5500 next year under the old name? I've been searching, but can't find the answer anywhere!!

If an employer wishes to cover individual premiums for dependents (i.e. lets say Medicaid) of employees, can this be done via a 125 plan? Please refer to 1.125-6(i) and 1.125-1(m)(1)

If not, anyone see any reasons why it couldn't flow through a 105 plan?

I'm preparing a volume submitter document and trying to decide what the benefit is in submitting the plan for determination regarding the ratio percentage test. Can anyone help with this? Is there any advantage to completing question 11 on the 5307?

A pension attorney recently said that there is a provision that plans are automatically frozen as a default.

That is, plans can be designed to have an automatic freeze.

He is not referring to the AFTAP test in connection with benefit restrictions.

I am not talking about making a plan amendment to freeze benefits, but more like a a standard plan provision.

Does anyone know what this attorney may be referring to?

Thanks.

Assume 457(f) DB SERP pays benefits at retirement lost as a result of limits on a "linked" qualfied plan (further assume compliance with 409A). Assume mid-year vesting after, say 5 years, meaning the present value of the accrued benefit is taxable at that time under 457(f), but ultimately paid at retirement (except for accelerated payments for withholding taxes). In years after vesting but before retirement, there will be additional accruals under the 457(f) plan due to incease in compensation and service credits.

For income inclusion purposes, I have in my head that these additional, post-vesting accruals will be taxable in the later years as they accrue (perhaps even on a month to month basis, which could have a withholding tax effect). However, I also have heard of 457(f) plans that use an "assumed retirement date" concept under which the actuaries' calculation take into account assumed future benefit accruals when determining the taxable amount in the year of vesting. My gut feeling is that the former approach is more appropriate, but I haven't come across anything definitive (perhaps b/c it is self evident?).

Defined Benefit Plan has employee contributions. My recent understanding is that if a plan allows any type of lump sum payment, it must also allow for an immediate annuity. I'm unclear however how to apply this to a DB plan where part of the accrued benefit is related to employee contributions. The plan does not normally allow for lump sum payments other than employee contributions with interest to terminated participants.

So my question is, in offering the participant the current value of their employee contributions, do we also offer them an immediate annuity which would be the actuarial equivalent of just the accrued benefit related to the employee contributions, or rather an immediate annuity of the full benefit, with or without the portion related to employee contributions.

Example of immediate annuities to a 40 year old:

eecwi portion: 15.00

ee&er portion: 75.00

lump sum taken & er portion: $65.00

Thank you.

How are assets of a Church qualified defined contribution plan held? If exempt from ERISA I assume there does not have to be a trust, but can there be a trust? Are most held in custodial accounts?

My client deposited their 2007 non elective contribution on 9/19/2008, so it was late. How is this corrected in regards to the corp. tax return and the plan? If they amend the corp tax return, can they deduct 2007 and 2008 on their 2008 return? Will that affect any testing for the plan 415, 401a4? I have never had this happen so I'm not sure what all is affected by the late deposit.

A small DB plan was adopted 1/1/2001 and was restated for GUST 1/1/2002. However, the prior opinion letter from 1/1/2001 cannot be located. Prior administrator went out of business.

The plan will now be terminated and will be submitted for a DL.

Does anyone think the IRS will require the opinion letter for the prior document (1/1/2001)? If it cannot be produced will they consider the initial plan as individually designed?

We do have an opinion letter for the GUST restatement as of 1/1/2002.

Both documents are volume plans.

We are converting a plan that was a managed by an insurance company, and durning the deconversion process they have locked up the stable value fund. The participants are allowed to transfer their assets from this investment to another investment, but when we convert the plan they will not allow the liquidation of the fund to transfer to the new custodian. Being that this is a seperate account product, we also cannot just sweep it into the same mutual fund based SVF.

It seems to me that although they have the right to do this due to some small print in the prospectus, that the government may take issue with the fact that participants are effectively forced into this investment for 12 months as their assets cannot be transfered over during plan conversion.

Does anybody know of any cases where the courts have ruled on a matter such as this, or any code section where this type of an issue is addressed?

I'm so impressed with the knowledge here. I'm starting my 8th week at a new job and I need opinions.

This company sponsors both a DB plan and a 401(k) plan (with a match). I used to work for attorneys so maybe I'm paranoid... This company routinely produced spreadsheets with "unofficial pension estimates" to participants interested in knowing their amount at NRA and other various ages (reduced). This was done to save actuarial fees. The spreadsheets my predecessor used for these are ridiculous, some with over 20 tabs, cells linked to other workbooks that I don't have, just an error waiting to happen. My predecessor and the company did this to "be nice" to employees but I'm seeing it as unnecessary risk exposure. All it takes is one wrong one to a litigious person and we have a virus in our employee population.

I am going to recommend we stop providing these and wanted to bolster that with more than just my own paranoia and training which is that you never put in writing an estimate, especially when it contains no reference to the plan doc, no caveats. It simply says this is "unofficial" and will be recalculated by the plan's actuary when you actually apply for your benefits. This plan covers approx 3,000 people.

Any input from experts out there? And it's not because I don't want to calculate the estimates, I would love to but I'm not an actuary. The spreadsheets I "inherited" however, are fraught with peril. The columns go out to HZ and the rows to about 370 for each person. YIKES! I might be able to clean them up and put in nested formulas, but I wanted to see if there was support out there in the DB / actuary world for NOT doing such estimates. Or am I just paranoid?

Thoughts anyone?? Thank you in advance!

We took over as a plan's TPA in July of this year.

The plan sponsor received a letter last week from the previous carrier stating that it passed tesing for 2007. There was one fix that has to be made because a participant's contribution from May 2007 was overmatched because the participant had taken a hardship and the deferral portion was returned, not the match. So $133.17 is supposed to be paid back to the company from the participant's match account.

What needs to be done regarding 5500s:

Does the 2007 5500 have to be ammended to reflect the change in employer contribution?

On the 2008 5500 would the $133 show on Schedule I line 2f?

Both?

Any other suggestions would be appreciated.

Also, would anyone know how to reflect this on the employer's tax return?

Thanks!

If you had purchased $1,000 of AIG stock one year ago, you would have $42 left.

With Lehman, you would have $6.60 left.

With Fannie or Freddie, you would have less than $5 left.

But if you had purchased $1,000 worth of beer one year ago, drank all of the beer, then turned in the cans for the aluminum recycling REFUND, you would have had $214.

Based on the above, the best current investment advice is to drink heavily and recycle.

It's called the 401-Keg.....

Does everyone agree that, pursuant to 409A's transition relief, I can amend a SERP plan (despite it's existing terms and 409A's general anti-acceleration rules) to state that it will be terminated this year, and all payments will be made next year in lump sums?

In advance, thanks for your comments.

The plan has the age maximum on dependent children at 25 (unless disabled). I found a dependent child over 25 that is not disabled on our plan. The child is 26 1/2 now. (no claims have been paid after age 25 by insurance company)

What is the plan obligation?

1) If the employee did not voluntarily remove the dependent from his/her coverage (did not notify us), are we obligated to send COBRA now? I wasn't sure if we were obligated, however we knew the child's date of birth.

2) If question 1 is yes: Is the employee responsible (if they decide to elect COBRA) for paying premiums retro from when the child was no longer covered up to now?

3) Can I remove an ineligible dependent with out the employees signature?

403(b) for a 501©(3) with matching contributions and they are interested in safe harbor to avoid ACP.

The Matching contributions must fall within the parameters of contribution minimums and maximums for matching contributions to avoid the ACP test under 401(m). These Matching contributions are not being used to automatically satisfy ADP since there is no ADP test.

Do these matching contributions used to satisfy ACP have to be immediately 100% vested?

I understand the other requirements for ACP safe harbor, i.e., no allocation restrictions, no hardship w/d need to be satisfied but wondering about vesting, since additional Matching in a 401(k) could satisfy ACP without being 100% vested. Thanks

Hello all,

I posted a question on here once before and got several great helpful responses, so I return with a few questions that I am hoping I can get answered as no one else seems to be able or willing to help.

I am considering investing in FAX in my roth ira, a foreign bond fund that kicks off a fair amount of distributions each month. I had previously invested in AAV, which was a canadian trust, it was subject to the 15% withholding, which I was unable to reclaim as it was in a tax sheltered account...

My question is whether or not the FAX fund would be subject to this same 15% withholding, as it really takes a chunk out of the returns and the whole purpose of this particular investment.

Is there anything else I should be aware of regarding bond funds in my roth IRA that this question shows that I am unaware of?

Thanks so much.

Kind regards to all,

Kevin

Does anyone have the cite for (I think it was) a DOL advisory opinion on the portion of attorney fees that can be charged against a plan for a termination?

Have a client who has managed to dig himself into a deep hole. Need a referral to an ERISA attorney in the Lawrence-Kansas City, KS area who can provide competent legal counsel and (almost certainly) prepare an EPCRS submission.

Thanks!