Approximately 5 years ago one of our DB plans created an

unreduced retirement benefit for those employees

with 30 years of service who were at least 57 years old.

Unfortunately, this was added to the definition of normal

retirement age in the plan document. In actuality, it is

an early, unreduced pension.

We would like to change the plan to correct this error. However,

there is some concern over the IRC and ERISA anti cutback

rules. If this change were made, the employees would

still have a right to the same form and amount of benefit,

it just would not be characterized as a normal retirment.

Thanks

I have a 401k plan where one of the hce's never deferred. Helped out the test each year. For some reason, now he doesn't get comp for tax purposes, but still works. Can I include him in the test?

I know that ERISA does not provide a statue of limitations for suing to recover delinquent employer contributions.

Does a state's contract SOL apply automatically?

Does a federal SOL govern?

How is the determination made?

If employees are given a choice at hire between different fully insured welfare benefit packages (benefits and less compensation OR no benefits and more compensation), is that a cafeteria plan? A formal cafeteria plan happens to be one of the benfits available to all employees, but new hires are allowed to choose between two employment categories, which directly affects whether they get high benefits/low cash or low benefits/high cash.

Is there any way to structure this to avoid technical questions about this being a 125 plan? Can we have employees execute a one-time irrevocable election to be one class over the other, or is there something that we are missing?

I know this is done a lot in the case of employees vs. independent contractor cases like Microsoft, but I have never heard about whether this creates an inadvertant 125 plan where the choice is between two classses of employees.

If I change funding method from Individual Aggregate to EANC, Rev Proc 2000-40 says the new unfunded is amortized over 10 years. This means that the minimum and the maximum are the same for the first year of change. Since gains/losses are amortized over 5 years (if I am not mistaken), for years that there are losses, the minimum is greater than the maximum, in which case the minimum applies. Is this correct or is there something wrong with my reasoning? If this is correct, is there a way to get a contribution range if you want to change from Individual Aggregate (at least in the first year)?

Stated simply, a Voluntary Salary Reduction Form was signed by error resulting in lower PERA benefits. The employer will not make the correction.

What are my options?

If employees are given a choice at hire between different fully insured welfare benefit packages (benefits and less compensation OR no benefits and more compensation), is that a CODA? If so, ADP testing obviously does not make sense, so what can we do. Is it an issue about the form or timing of the election or does something need to be done to change the proposed structure. I know this is done a lot in the case of employees vs. independent contractor cases like Microsoft, but I have never heard about whether this creates an inadvertant CODA.

A plan had more than 120 participants not too long ago. Due to economic conditions, the participant count is now 84. The client's CPA is stating that the plan can now file as a small plan, thereby avoiding the audit. Is this too good to be true? I thought that once a plan filed as a large plan, they had to continue to do so. I apologize for the simplicity of this question, but my supervisor wants a regulatory citation supporting the correct answer, and I cannot find one. Any assistance will be appreciated. Thank you.

If a plan sponsor should decide to amend the plan to allow a person into the plan that was erroneously included earlier than he should have (i.e. should have waited 6months but entered immediatelyin 2001), can the retroactive amendment be worded ---"immediate entry effective 1/1/2001, and 6 months wait effective 1/1/02", with an adoption date of 2003? In other words, retain the current eligibility requirements but adjust for only one year when the error occurred.

Thanks.

We've got a takeover plan never amended for GUST. No GUST certification letter & it does not appear that prior prototype provider submitted for GUST letter before 12/31/00. Plan will adopt our prototype. It seems to me that plan can correct under VCP. Using VCP the plan sponsor is required to submit for a determination letter.

Is my understanding correct?

Thanks in advance for any guidance.

Ex-spouse has taken me back to court to modify QDRO. Ex took early retirement one day after divorce last year. I chose single life annuity and funds have been disbursed. The QDRO ordered Brown Formula/Real-Time Rule. Marriage was 15 years, ex was employed for 37.9 years, plan vested at 25.

Actuarial worked numbers using when the plan vested (25) because employer does not credit employee with service over 25. If the 37.9 years was used, my portion would be sizeably less. Plan Administrator said no changes may be made to QDRO and the annuity is irrevocable. I no longer have an attorney because after our Feb. hearing the QDRO was approved and is now paying out and I thought that was the end. I am now representing myself and the judge asked me to see if I could find any case laws where QDROs were modified under same circumstances. HELP!!! There is so much information out there, I'm overwhelmed and do not particularly know how to reseach case laws. Any help would be appreciated. Located in California. Thank you in advance for any help/info.

I'm setting up a new Safe Harbor 401k Plan effective 1/1/03 for a dental practice that began 1/1/03. The 401k portion will be effective 10/1/03. A non-elective contribution will be allocated to all participants who worked 501 hours if terminated or are an employee as of the end of the year.

Eligibility is Age 21 and One Year of Service. In order to make contributions for 2003, we were allowing all employees as of 1/1/03 to enter the plan on that date if they had met the age 21 requirement.

There was one fill-in employee who was on the payroll 1/1/03. This employee will not work 500 hours during 2003. From what I understand, this fill-in employee will become a participant as of 1/1/03 and will be entitled to the 3% Safe Harbor contribution. She will also be entitled to any non-elective contribution if she is still employed as of 12/31/03.

Am I on the right track here? Thanks.

I have a new ESOP, therefore I am filing the first 5500. Here is my question. The employer deposited $175,000 for the first year, allocating about 4% to everyone. The beginning balance was obviously $0 and the deposit of $175,000 was deposited on the last day of the plan year. Therefore, the account balance at the Bank looks like this:

Plan Year 2/1/02 - 1/31/03

$175,000 deposited on - deposited 1/31/03

$10.45 paid in interest - year to date interest

$175,010.45 - balance of the account

Do I just need to show that deposit of $175,000 on Schedule I and the interest of $10.45?

I'm not sure how fill it out Schedule I?

Thanks.

A physicians practice (corporation) has a profit sharing plan and each physician wants the discretion each year to receive in their plan account all or part of the maximum allowed profit sharing contribution each year. Is this allowable? In other words, can HCEs determine what amount of profit sharing contribution they receive?

Is there a website that explains how to administer an ESOP and complete the IRS 5500 for them as well. I have the 5500 instruction booklet, and I know what schedules I need, however I am just not familiar with ESOPs in general.

Help!!!

A plan goes over the limit for the first time in 2001 and does the audit as required. Then the plan terminates in 2002 and all assets are out by 12/31/02. We're doing the final 5500 and hate to force a financially strapped client to pay for an audit for a terminated plan. Is there any relief from this requirement for terminated plans?

If we file the final 5500 without an audit, does the client risk a penalty? If so, how much?

Would it be reasonable for an ESOP sponsor to have signed a certification to adopt a volume submitter plan?

Controlled group has three companies, A, B, and C, each of which have a 401(k) plan with a match and profit sharing contribution.

Anything preventing aggregating the profit sharing components of A and B for 410(b) and 401(a)(4) purposes, while aggregating the 401(k) and 401(m) components of B and C for 410(b), ADP and ACP testing?

I think this is fine. Anybody disagree?

If a minimum distribution was made to a participant from an ESOP that only provided for lump sum distributions - can the minimum distribution be viewed as a "erroneous" distribution? Can the participant return the distribution to the ESOP and then receive a lump sum distribution? Could the participant then request a lump sum rollover into an IRA? Does the original "erroneous" distribution prevent the ability for the participant to make a rollover distribution? Lots of questions.

Can someone refer me to what was either an IRS Notice or PLR that discusses when an employer buys out surrender charges on annuities when a transfer of assets is made, that the IRS considers the buyout an employer contribution not only for testing purposes but also for deductibility? I know this is vague but hopefully someone here has a far better memory than I in locating this. Thank you.