under the trust exemption of GLB, how can banks effectivly deal with privacy issues and the mandate vs prohibition on sharing client info/data??

anyone have a relevant comparison on the privacy issues under the two acts?

I have a participant who took a plan loan from his 401(k) plan. the company is now filing for bankruptcy (chapter 7) and the plan is being terminated. Short of paying the full balance off is there any way to keep the participant from suffering a premature withdrawl/defaulted loan? The loan balance is large so paying it off is really not possible. Any one with any creative ideas. I can't come up with any. Thanks

We have a client who sponsors a defined benefit plan subject to PBGC coverage and a profit sharing plan. There are three participants common to both plans who have left and are nowhere to be found (presumably out of the country). The DB plan is OK as payment can be made to the PBGC using the Missing Participants program. PS plan is a little more problematic.

One idea brought up in a brainstorming session was to deem that their PS balances are deemed to be "rolled over" to the DB plan and then paid to the PBGC. This allows total distribution from the PS plan and presumably allows for these participants to have a better chance to actually see their monies somewhere down the road. Any comments?

When can an existing plan adopt the safe harbor features. For example, we have a plan with a June 30 fiscal year-end, can we amend for Safe Harbor features effective July 1, 2002?

In addition, we would like to convert the plan on May 1, 2002. Do we convert the plan as is and then amend it for July 1, 2002?

Thanks.

MP had five-year cliff vesting, with forfeitures used to reduce contribution.

MP merged into PS this year.

PS plan has forfeitures reallocated on same basis as 401(a).

In 2002 there will be forfeitures due to terminations of many non-vested employees. In order for the forfeitures to be used to reduce, does the PS plan have to be amended due to the merger? Has this situation come up with anyone else yet?

Please advise. Thanks.

What is the "Caledar Year Election" and when is it used? I know what the calendar year data election is but am confused on the CYE

Is there any advantages/disadvantages to choosing to reduce the ACP to correct multiple use? What about ADP?

A plan's adoption agreement elects to reduce both ADP and ACP for multiple use. This seems like an odd election that will result in the greatest refunds for the HCEs.

Any opinions?

I have a client who is going to put in their annual 3% safe harbor contribution. Is it permissible to base that on compensation from date of entry into plan, if that's what document states?

Hi -

I have a question about communication requirements and/or practices to participants

We currently provide a packet of information on our Profit Sharing plan to all new hires and to newly eligible employees. The packet includes Fund Facts sheets on all the 17 funds we offer, a sheet showing a recent comparison of rates of return (going back 10 years), and the most recent copy of our SPD. The packet itself is contained within a large publication that gives general information about how 401(k)s work. We also provide quarterly statements to our Profit Sharing participants. On the Rates of Return sheet included in with the statements, is a note to contact HR for a current prospectus of any of the funds.

We do not provide prospectuses (prospecti?!) to new hires, nor do we distribute new ones each year. If we should change an investment election, we will provide a prospectus on the new fund to all participants. The fund fact sheets are also only provided in the new hire packets - or, again, if we change an investment election (and then we send out all the fund fact sheets on all the funds).

I can't find anything that tells me we must send out prospectuses to new hires or existing eligible staff. Nor do I see anything about sending out additional information about the funds like a fund fact sheet. Members on our committee are taking extremes in what they think is appropriate: status quo (not changing current practices) to sending prospectuses to new hires (and newly eligibles) and once a year to everyone, in addition to sending updated fund fact sheets every quarter to all participants. But, no one is sure what's required and what's simply "normal practice."

Is there something out there I'm missing regarding ERISA requirements? If not, what have you found to be the general practices in your experience? I want to make sure we provide up-to-date information to our employees - but not go overboard with the mailings.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Is there a regulated time limit in which employers must send in employee deferrals to a 403(B) Plan.

If so, are there penalties for non-compliance.

Thanks

Can anyone briefly explain to me these differences...i am not a rocket Scientist....so I need help !

Thanks.:confused:

I have a prospect meeting next week, and the thought just struck me - what are the client's options if they have not signed a letter of intent to adopt someone's prototype? I know that you do receive the extension of time to 12/31/02 (calendar year plan) if you continue with the same entity that sponsored your pre-GUST prototype, but I am curious about the effect of switching in this "interim" period.

TIA

My company is considering engaging a financial advice provider for our 401(k) plan. We are considering a provider that we own a small part of (it could be around 10%). Would it be a prohibited transaction to hire that provider?

My company is considering engaging a financial advice provider for our 401(k) plan. We are considering a provider that we own a small part of (it could be around 10%). Would it be a prohibited transaction to hire that provider?

I posted this under the 5500 topic as well. If a Flexible Spending Account Plan terminated on 12/31/01 and participants are still within the closing period to submit claims (assets are still in the account), would the employer file a final year filing for the 2001 plan year or after the close out period in 2002? (A 2002 short/final year filing)

:eek:

We have a self-funded Indemnity plan, the plan has a $100.00 individual deductible, $200.00 family deductible, then plan will pay 80% within UCR. Correct me if I am wrong. An employee has not incurred any medical expenses this year as of yet, but his dependents have (so far $195.00). The employee says that the plan should have paid the claims after the $100.00 was met. I told him and my benefits coordinator that the claims were processed accurately. Because the $200.00 must be met before the plan will pay the claim. They are saying that the employee's deductible has nothing to do with the family's deductible. I said not so, because again the plan has a $200.00 deductible. When the $200.00 has been met then we will pay any claims, and the employee does not have meet his $100.00 because his dependents have met the $200.00 with their claims. Is there anywhere or anything I can put my hands on to show them that a family includes the employee and the dependents. Thanks.

I have seen a number of references to filing a final form 5500 for pension plans with left over assets. Based on the 2001 filing instructions, I believe this would apply to left over funds in a Flexible Spending Account. Am I correct with this determination? Here is the situation:

I have a client that has canceled their calendar year plan as of 12/31/01. Though no further claims can be incurred for that plan year, the participants are still within the closing period to submit claims for that plan year and there are still funds available in the account. Would the 2001 filing be a final year filing or would they have to file a final year filing for 2002, after the account has a zero balance?

What is the corrective action that should be taken if stocks (or any other investment other than domestic mutual funds or other regulated investment companies) are invested in a 4039b)(7) account?

Is the 403(B)(7) account disqualified?

Thanks for your help

Shelton

In prior years the plan exluded commissions from the definition of compensation. The employer know wants to use full compensation. Is it possible incorporating a more inclusive definition of compensation to be a cut back of benefits? For example, if this change benefits HCE's because they earn more commissions.

What issues arise where cross-tested PSP has classes defined as a specific individual,e.g., Class A is Joe Jones, Class B is Jim Smith, etc...? Thanks for your help.