If a contributory DB plan is frozen providing for no future accruals can the plan continue to require that contributions be made by employees? In this situation the plan would, however, provide for an accrual to the extent that the accrued benefit derived by employee contributions, as determined according to IRC 411©, exceeded the plan’s formula benefit.

What if you have members from one union (say "A") working for an employer and the employer makes contributions to the 401k plan but made them to the wrong union plan (say "B"). There is no reciprocity agreement between the two unions A and B. It has been caught within the 6 months to return mistaken contributions to the employer but there have been gains on the contributions. How do we get contributions and the gains to the correct plan for the participants? Of can we?

Should a plan document be prepared only by lawyers?

Those interested in the "unlicensed practice of law" issue, in states where bar associations seek to apply those rules to plan document preparation by non-lawyers, will want to look at this site (which I just came across) for support or in horror, depending on your position:

http://www.naldp.org/

I do not have a lot of recent multi-er experience, but I was wondering - is it common for plans to use one rate for funding, but a different interest rate assumption for w/drawal liability?

If so, does this make sense?

thx!!

A US citizen is paid by a foreign subsidiary of a US Corporaton. This income is taxable as 'foreign income' for purposes of US income taxes.

Can we use this income to determine benefits under the US Corporation's qualified plan(s)?

I think that I remember in the last year a new law being passed that if a dependent delays going to college to go to the military, then they get an additional time period to remain on their parents coverage when they do return home and enter college. Example, dependent goes to the military at age 20 and therefore is removed from health insurance. Dependent returns home at age 22 and begins college (change in status and added to parent's plan). Our age cutoff is 23 but I think the dependent is allowed to stay on because of a military exception but I can't find it anywhere. Can anyone help? Thanks for your help.

Greetings all,

I'm looking for help with a code site so that I've got something for my files.

I've got a client who is a statutory employee with a life insurance company. She's also in that life insurance company's plan and has made deferrals and received an employer contribution allocation.

She's also got her own plan with her own company. She's adding the W2 from the life insurance company to her Schedule C compensation.

When they're not benefitting from another company's plan that kind of makes sense with what I understand about a Statutory Employee. However, when that W2 compensation is being used to provide an Employee benefit under another Employer's plan, how do we use that very same compensation twice?

What am I missing?

Following up on a thread posted below re ER-specific data from a multiemployer plan, we had a multi-ER group health care plan that was informed that premiums were to be increased by over 10%. when asked about the basis for the increase, the fund administrator refused to release that information (claiming there was a confidentiality agrmn't in place between the fund and the health care insurer).

Is there any provision in ERISA or the DOL regs that would require the fund administrator and/or insurer to release basis for the 10%+ premium increase?

I think that I remember in the last year a new law being passed that if a dependent delays going to college to go to the military, then they get an additional time period to remain on their parents coverage when they do return home and enter college. Example, dependent goes to the military at age 20 and therefore is removed from health insurance. Dependent returns home at age 22 and begins college (change in status and added to parent's plan). Our age cutoff is 23 but I think the dependent is allowed to stay on because of a military exception but I can't find it anywhere. Can anyone help? Thanks for your help.

Employer fails 401(k) test for 2005 - not corrected until 2007 - being corrected by use of QNEC's as outlined in EPCRS. Plan was also top-heavy for the year - question - can the QNEC's being made to fix the failed APD test also count towards the 3% top-heavy minimum due the plan? I could find nothing in ERISA outline book which references this.

Eligibility for retiree medical benefits requires that retiree have 15 years of service after age 47. An employee who retired early under Pension plan, but did not have the required 15 years of service after age 47, was inadvertantly enrolled in the retiree health plan. Can the plan stop providing benefits to this individual?

Participant was receiving minimum distributions. He died in 2005. A mrd wad made in 2006. Beneficiary is participant's daughter. Can she rollover the account balance to an "inherited" IRA (if plan allows) in 2007? If so, over what time period must the daughter take out minimum distributions?

If an employee terminates in the middle of the year, having been deducted say half of their election, but they claim the full amount of their election, isn’t the second half really a taxable income to the employee? Why would the IRS not want us to withhold the full election on termination? It’s not a matter of an elimination of the risk of loss to the employer, it is a case of the employee potentially receiving un-taxed income.

If an employer sponsors a 403(b) with a match, do the deferral deposits fall under the same DOL timing as 401(k) plans?

Are these notices required for 403b plan?

Are SEP plans subject to the PPA 06 quarterly benefit statement requirements?

Does anyone have any info on possible ways to avoid sanctions arising out of the IRS crackdown on 412(i) plans? For example, we want to argue that the plan sponsor operated the plan as it was approved in the prototype opinion letter, and thus sanctions should be N/A. I have heard that some sponsors have been successful in getting sanctions waived based on that type of argument, but we cannot find anything helpful. Any leads, articles, etc. would be appreciated.

Am I correct to say that if an employee terminated in 2006 with less than 500 hours, that they should not be included in the New Comp Nondiscrimination Testing?

Thank you, AJM

It appears Eli Lilly has found yet another application for prescription drug Prozac (yes, the anti-depressant), and is hawking it to dog owners. Somewhere out there an employer probably provides veterinary benefits for employees, and now its costs will go up.

-- Dave Baker

---

Apr 25, 2007 08:00 ET

Eli Lilly and Company Introduces Reconcile™ for Separation Anxiety in Dogs

At-Home BOND™ Behavior Modification Training Plan Complements Drug's Efficacy

INDIANAPOLIS, April 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Eli Lilly and Company (NYSE:LLY) announced today it has received approval from the FDA to market Reconcile™ (fluoxetine hydrochloride), the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class of antidepressants approved by the FDA for treatment of canine separation anxiety in conjunction with behavior modification training. Reconcile™ is the first Lilly product approved by the FDA for dogs and is now available to U.S. veterinarians.

"Lilly research shows that 10.7 million, or up to 17 percent of U.S. dogs(1) suffer from separation anxiety," said Steve Connell, D.V.M., manager of technical, academic and consumer services for companion animal health at Lilly. "We're thrilled that our first product for dogs can help restore the human-pet bond, which can be compromised when dogs suffer from separation anxiety."

Reconcile™ is a once-daily, chewable, flavored tablet that may be prescribed by a veterinarian in weight-specific doses for use in conjunction with behavior modification training to treat canine separation anxiety. The drug is proven safe for dogs and puppies 6 months or older.

In field studies of approximately 600 dogs, 73 percent of dogs receiving Reconcile™ showed improvement in separation anxiety-related behavior within eight weeks when compared with dogs receiving behavior modification training alone. Within one week of starting Reconcile™ treatment and behavior modification training, 42 percent of dogs showed improvement. During trials, the most common adverse reactions to Reconcile™ were calm or lethargy, reduced appetite, vomiting, shaking, diarrhea, restlessness, excessive vocalization, aggression and -- in infrequent cases -- seizures.

Reconcile™ allows dogs to be more receptive to your training to help with anxiety

Canine separation anxiety is a prevalent and often misunderstood behavior problem, according to Connell. It amounts to undesirable behavior that occurs when the dog is left alone even for short periods of time. The resulting anxiety may cause the dog to engage in inappropriate behavior, such as destruction, excess vocalization and inappropriate elimination. Anorexia and depression also may be observed in some cases. "Your family veterinarian may recommend certain tests before diagnosing separation anxiety," Connell added. "Such tests are used to rule out other potential physiological causes of inappropriate behavior."

For dogs affected by separation anxiety, Reconcile™ reduces inappropriate behaviors, minimizes the pet's distress and increases receptivity to a simple training plan called the BOND™ modification training plan.

The BOND™ behavior modification program is an easy-to-implement, at-home training plan developed by Lilly and a team of veterinary behaviorists as well as veterinarians. The simple plan allows dog owners to take an active role in the treatment of their pet's separation anxiety to help restore the human-pet bond. Dog owners whose veterinarians have prescribed Reconcile™ receive educational materials to enable them to follow an easy four-step training plan to reinforce positive pet behavior which helps to reduce or eliminate inappropriate responses to anxiety. Components include a take-home DVD, printed materials and in-home reminders so the whole family can reinforce behavior modification training for the dog.

Debra F. Horwitz, D.V.M., and a diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists, was among the veterinary behaviorists involved in developing the BOND™ program. "Learning and memory are important in the formation and maintenance of anxieties," said Horwitz. "Decreasing anxiety can help pets learn and, through training, they can learn new responses to stimuli that have triggered separation anxiety in the past. The development of the BOND™ behavior modification plan is an important complement to Reconcile™ in the treatment of separation anxiety."

For more information about Reconcile™ and the BOND™ behavior modification program, which are available only through veterinarians, visit http://www.reconcile.com/ . Important safety information and the product label also can be found at http://www.reconcile.com/ .

Lilly, a leading innovation-driven corporation, is developing a growing portfolio of first-in-class and best-in-class pharmaceutical products by applying the latest research from its own worldwide laboratories and from collaborations with eminent scientific organizations. Headquartered in Indianapolis, Lilly provides answers -- through medicines and information -- for some of the world's most urgent medical needs. Additional information about Lilly is available at http://www.lilly.com/ . Information about Lilly products for pets is available at http://www.lillypet.com/ .

™ Reconcile and BOND are registered trademarks of Eli Lilly and

Company.

(1) Lilly Research 2006

Source: Eli Lilly and Company

CONTACT: Joan Todd of Eli Lilly and Company, +1-317-433-0121; or John

Dutcher of McCormick Co., +1-515-238-5051, for Eli Lilly and Company

Web site: http://www.lilly.com/

http://www.lillypet.com/

http://www.reconcile.com/

What's the general approach for offering the Social Security Leveling option to terminated employees who want to start receving their benefits?

Can it only be offered to participants retiring directly from employment (between ages 55 and 62)? That way we can base the calculation on their final compensation.

Or can it be offered to any participant who terminated after age 55, and later came back to start receiving benefits prior to age 62?

I'm not very familiar with this option in general.