I follow with great interest the releases from Treasury, DOL, and other agencies on the efforts to assist individuals with financial education (and as I call it, financial empowerment through education). However, I am an individual, not a nonprofit. I keep looking for ways to assist and become involved in this effort in a professonal manner-this is a passion of mine. Any ideas on how to get involved with the federal, state, and local governments with these efforts? How do I lose my invisibility and let the powers know that there actually is an individual who is a financial planner (CFP certificant), lawyer, and financial educator/writer (and thus qualified professionally) who wants to do this professionally (for modest pay) and is not interested in the multi-millionare client.

thanks!

Theresa Lynn

Help. Employer is on a volume submitter plan document and several related participating employers have also adopted the plan. Each participating employer decides whether to make a match each year and picks from three different formulas, one being 0% (or no match for the year_.

Since I have never seen this before it makes me question whether it is possible. If the plan is able to pass the ACP test, the NDCT for the different rate of matching and, and 410(b) coverage treating the 0% EES are nonexcludable, are there still document design issues or the existence of many single employer plans being packaged as one plan?

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.

If it is determined that the QJSA under a plan is not as valuable (in actuarial equivalence terms) as other optional forms of benefit, meaning that the plan's actuarial assumptions must be changed, how should this be done so as not to cause 401(a) disqualification problems. Is this something that should (or even can) be amended on a retroactive bases? How is this best accomplished?

I know you can't but I can't find it in the Code or the Regs. For example, 401(k)(12) clearly states that the SHNEC's can't use integration. Further, 1.401(l)-(1)indicates that contribtuions described in 1.401(k)–1(g)(3) are not eligible for integration, but this defintiion does not include QNEC's?

I'm driving myself nuts trying to find it...

We have a participant that was out on disability & not contributing to her FSA Medical. She was out of work for over 30 days & opted to change her election to a lower amount. Will this change also effect her annual election? She went from contributing $92.31 to $20 per pay. It is a biweekly pay schedule. Prior to the leave she had spent a good amount of money. Since she has changed her election amount, her annual election is very low. She only has about $3 left. Any help would be great!

Thanks!

I am in PA and am talking with a public school district that is looking for options for its administrators. They are trying to retain these folks and are willing to look at district funded options. The admins are not part of the teachers union so I am thinking that they could be excluded. Has anyone have any experiance in this? You coments are greatly appreciated.

Can a plan that uses the safe harbor defininition of hardships have a suspension period longer than 6 months?

a possible new client received hardship distribution checks this year on behalf of the participants. the checks were made payable to the plan and then the plan issued the check to the participant. the institution holding the funds did not withhold taxes so if a participant needed a $3000 hardship that was the amount removed from their account. can the trustee go back and request additional funds to be removed to cover taxes? also, in previous years when distributions occurred, taxes WERE withheld but the trustee has no record of the 1099 reporting being done. the company holding the funds does not prepare them, and nor does their current TPA. what sort of exposure or liability does this cause the trustee?

After speaking with an IRS auditor, it appears they have on their radar to look at specific DB offset plans where HCE's have a higher benefit formula and NHCE's a lower benefit formula. It seems as if more than 60% of the nonexcludables have less than the 0.5% benefit AFTER the offset, then they are ruling that it doesn't meet the requirements of 401(a)(26). I am being somewhat general here because I got my first question from the IRS on this today and haven't gleaned some of the specifics.

Has anyone had a similar experience or heard anything more specific from the IRS?

Has anyone used a computer program to help them write thier cafeteria plan and if so which one?

Does FMLA distinguish between medical necessity and cosmetic surgery?

I'm full of questions today.

I have a profit sharing plan that uses forfeitures to reduce employer contribution. What happens when the employer decides not make a contribution for the year in which there is a forfeiture? Can we allocate the forfeiture to existing participants? The document is not clear on what to do when there is no contribution to reduce.

Thanks.

A group health plan has decided to eliminate dependent coverage as an option. The question is how this affects COBRA participants. Moving forward, there will be no COBRA coverage for dependents. However, two individuals have elected and are currently receiving family coverage under COBRA. Can the group health plan cease to provide COBRA coverage for the dependents covered under this family coverage?

Under the regulations, if coverage is modified for similarly situated nonCOBRA beneficiaries, then the coverage made available to qualified beneficiaries is modified in the same way. This seems to indicate that if no dependent coverage is offered under the group health plan, then the group health plan would not be obligated to continue to provide COBRA coverage to dependents. However, there are also a number of instances in the regulations that speak in terms of all qualified beneficiaries being given the same rights as active employees (e.g., to elect particular benefits or benefit options). If the dependents receiving COBRA coverage are treated as active employees, it seems as though they could not be dropped from COBRA coverage. Also, this does not seem to fall within the list of circumstances for which early termination of COBRA coverage is permitted. It seems that the best approach here is to continue providing COBRA coverage to the dependents in these circumstances, even though dependent coverage has been eliminated under the group health plan. Any thoughts?

When a plan permits disregarding of rollover account balance in determining whether there should be a forced payout (less than $5,000), is the entire account balance forced out (including rollover) or just the portion attributable to sources other than rollover?

Can you provide cite? Thanks.

Is anyone aware of a source that provides a state-by-state summary of MEWA regulation?

Thanks in advance.

If a tax-exempt organization sponsors a 403(b) for salary deferral purposes, but makes matching contributions to a 401(k) plan, is the 401(k) plan subject to ACP testing? I believe it is, but just need some clarification. Thanks

A client is terminating a money purchase pension plan (on which it has already received a determination letter as to the termination) and is now trying to distribute assets and close out the plan. Unfortunately, there are missing participants who could not be located using either the IRS or SSA locator programs. In trying to set up individual IRA accounts in the participants' names to hold the monies, the client has been told that, under the Patriot Act, they must have participant signatures to set up the accounts. Obviously, signatures cannot be obtained. Any thoughts?

Notice 2004-50, Q/A 24 effectively permits prorating the minimum deductible for periods longer than 12 months.

Allowing proration also for periods less than 12 months (e.g., for single coverage, permitting a $500 deductible for a six month short plan year)

seems logical, but is not addressed in the Q/A. Consequently, I don't think "short" proration is permitted. Is there any consensus on the issue? Can anyone provide any items addressing the issue, one way or another?

Plan was amended to change what events constitute an event of default, but existing loans were not grandfathered. Now the plan has a default event that is not in the note, so which controls? Although we need the notes to be vaild under state law to be eligible for the statutory PTE, can we argue that the plan controls over the note because of preemption?

A participant has been separated for eight years (PA) and is looking to receive a distribution from her PSP account. The account has psp & prior money purchase pension plan assets in this account. We sent to her a spousal consent form to be signed if she were married. She indicated to me that formal divorce proceedings have not started because there is disagreement by parties on the allocation of the property. I asked the participant if her account is listed as part of the property and she indicated yes.

Could someone please let me know if I was correct in stating to the participant that until the proceedings have taken place and the property is split she is not entitled to a distribution of her account unless the spouse consents and signs the spousal consent form?