After the end of the GUST remedial amendment period (or after the 2001 RMD proposed regulations become effective), can partcipants still be given the option to defer distributions until termination of employment? Or was this option only allowed for plan documents that had not been amended to make the SBJPA change to Required Beginning Date?

Asked a different way: Under the 2001 proposed regs, can a plan document specify that the Required Beginning Date will be ag3 70 1/2 for all employees, but that participants will be given the option to defer their Required Beginning Date to as late as termination of employment?

Thank you to those who responded to my query regarding beneficiary status. I am currently trying to get the alleged Pension Administrator of my ex- husband's company to confirm in writing the details he has e-mailed me. I am not too sure that it isn't my ex-husband in disguise-he's the company's director of Human Resources. What rights do I have to disclosure.? I was not named on the 401k plan although I was married to my husband at the time. Is there an official body that can require the company to divulge the information?

Anyone know of a good PA lawyer?

Thank you for any advice

A private nonprofit has had a non-ERISA 403(B) arrangement for its employees for some considerable time.

Employer now wants to add matching contributions and is establishing an ERISA plan in order to do so. Is the initial effective date for the plan: (A) the date the new plan is established or (B) the date the non-ERISA 403(B) arrangement first came into existence?

Does it make any difference that the employer "memorialized" the terms of the non-ERISA plan, in writing, sometime in 2000? The written summary of terms does not contain all info. required under ERISA.

A and B are each 100% shareholder employees in their respective S-corps. A has regular full-time employees,B does not. A and B are also 50/50 members of an LLC. All are engaged in computer/software consulting and service. A's employees spend approximately 25% of their time working on projects for the LLC's customers, for which A bills the LLC. A sponsors a profit sharing plan covering himself and his employees. B derives 50-75% of his income from the LLC,paid to his corporation.A,B, and LLC do not form a controlled group. Is there an affiliated service group somewhere in the pile? Can B sponsor a plan in his corporation that will only benefit him?

Situation: A privately held company makes its match in company stock and gives its employees the right to sell the stock and to move the proceeds into any one of a variety of other choices (which presumably qualify under 404©). The company does not allow the employees to reinvest the funds in the company stock account, however. Does the plan qualify under ERISA 404©? I need any assistance. Thanks.

Say a participant chooses a 50% j&s pension, since he is remarried.

Say his gross pension = 1,000 and his ex spouse is to receive $ 500.

Would this result in the participant receiving a 50% j&s based solely on his $ 500 pension, as if there was no other pension and would his ex wife still be entitled to her $ 500, however she chooses to receive pension?

Any thoughts?

Hello,

I have a rather interesting situation: I have an

employee who is being leased to Employer C by Leasing Organization A (FYI: Employer C's 401(k)

plan has a 6-month service requirement).

The employee has met, or will very shortly meet, the 6-month service requirement for plan participation. However, Leasing Organization A is in the process of ending their business relationship with Employer C.

Employer C has now established a business relationship (for employee leasing purposes) with Leasing Organization B. As a result, the employee in question must now sign a new contract with Leasing Organization B. The employee is now being told that her prior service with Employer C under Leasing Organization A's contract will be disregarded for 401(k) participation eligibility purposes (i.e., she will have to wait another 6 months before being able to participate in Employer C's plan).

I believe that the change in leasing organizations is not relevant as far as the employee's eligibility to begin active participation in Employer C's 401(k) plan shortly, since she has met the service requirement.

Any helpful feedback on this issue would be greatly appreciated.

Assume that an employer stock fund held by a 401(k) will be designated as an ESOP.

The Plan currently provides that participants may elect to take distribution in the form of a lump sum or annual installment payments up to 15 installments.

Question: Does the Plan need to change its distribution requirements in order to meet the requirements of Section 409(o)?

Thanks in advance!

Does anyone have any idea how payroll companies will be handling the age 50 catch-up contributions? Will payroll companies be collecting participants' dates of birth? Will payroll companies that currently stop deferrals at the 402(g) limit now stop deferrals for plans that use catch-up at the 402(g) plus age 50 catch-up limit? How will payroll companies identify age 50 catch-up contributions that become age 50 catch-up due to the ADP limit?

We have a plan whose employer wants to convert their 401k to an ESOP in order to take advantage of the Code 404(k) deduction. Obviously, one of the investment options in the 401k is employer stock.

My concern lies with the fact that the employer wishes to allow participants to continue to direct their investments (deferral and match - the plan has no profit sharing component). Basically, they want to continue to operate as a 401k, but on an ESOP document.

I have never heard of an ESOP where a participant could opt out of company stock via an investment election. This employer's accounting firm is really pushing this issue, stating they have done this same thing with other clients.

Am I missing something, or can participants (under 55) in an ESOP opt out of investing in the company stock and the plan is still an ESOP? Any suggestions, cites etc. would be greatly appreciated.

I have a Money Purchase Plan and a Profit Sharing Plan. With the new EGTRRA maximums in the Profit Sharing Plan in 2002, we want to dump the Money Purchase Plan. Is it better to merge the two plans or terminate the Money Purchase and roll proceeds to the Profit Sharing?

If merging is the better way to go, what steps do I need to take? (i.e. notification to employees, amendment, final 5500 etc.)I have been unable to find clear instructions on merging in my research.

Thank you.

Situation: A privately held company makes its match in company stock and gives its employees the right to sell the stock and to move the proceeds into any one of a variety of other choices (which presumably qualify under 404©). The company does not allow the employees to reinvest the funds in the company stock account, however. Does the plan qualify under ERISA 404©? I need any assistance. Thanks.

My question is regarding eligibility. We have a plan that has it service requirement as 6 months and an employee can enter semi -annually. The employer wants to amend their plan effective 1/1/2002 so that the service requirements are one year and quarterly entry. My question is regarding an employee that is hired 9/1/01. They will not have met their eligibility requirements by the end of the year to participate in the plan. Since the amendment takes effect in 1/1/02, when would that person be eligible to participate in the plan? Do you follow the old service requirements or does that employee fall under the new amendment and has to wait one year?

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Assume that Company A, a Fortune 500 Company, is in the process of making a number of acquisitions. Company A maintains Plan X, a 401 (k) plan. What are people doing in each of the following situations to protect the qualification of Plan X: (a) Company A buys Company B and merges its Plan Y into Plan X; (B) Company A buys the assets of a trade or business of Company C, another Fortune 500 Company, where the trade or business employs 75 employees; © Company A transfers 30 employees of Company A's subsidiary, A-1, and wants to transfer their account balances under Company A-1's plan, Plan Z, into Plan X. Company A-1 has taken a number of aggressive positions on a number of issues involving Plan Z; and (d) assume the same facts as in example ©, except that Company A-1's CEO is transferred to Company A and only her account balance under Plan Z is spun off into Plan X.

How do the requirements of USERRA work with a multi-employer plan? Obviously, the employee works or can work for several employers during any period of time. If this multi-employer plan participant goes on military leave, how are the USERRA benefits and contributions made up? How are the credits allocated between employers? As you can tell I don't work with multi-employer plans but was asked the question. I figured I could learn something so I am looking into the matter. Thanks!

I have read conflicting items as to the proper definition of compensation for determining the match in a SIMPLE plan. Is it the 401(a)(17) definition or something else?

After leaving employment at a private, Catholic affiliated hospital, my wife rolled her 403(B) plan to her IRA. It has been a complete nightmare, primarily due to the plan's administrator, Lincoln Life. Their delays and general lack of cooperation caused her account to lose over $3000 in value, plus an additional $150 in illegal fees.

I call them illegal because the process for acount liquidation is clearly defined in my wife's contract. The loss in account value also occurred because LL did not adhere to their own policies, also outlined in the contract.

We have been informed by her former employer that this plan does not fall under ERISA, therefore the Dept. of Labor will not intervene. Can anyone suggest another avenue? Lincoln Life obviously insists that they have done no wrong, and hiring an attorney would exceed any possible financial recovery (as LL well knows !!). Any help or suggestions would be GREATLY appreciated. Thanks.

Doug

This is intended as a poll of how the different readers of this message board would handle the following situations.

Assume Company A is a Fortune 500 company and maintains Plan X. Company A is in the process of making several acquisitions. In certain cases, Company A merges the plan of the acquired business. How would you determine the qualification of the plan that is being merged into or that is spinning off a portion of its plan into Plan X in the following situations: (a) Company A buys Company B and merges Plan Y into Plan X? (B) Company A buys the assets of a small trade or business of Company C and has Plan Z spin off the account balances of the employees of the sold trade or business into Plan X?; © Company A takes Officer M from its subsidiary A-1 and wants to spinoff his account balance under Plan W?

The problem is that the official IRS position is that a plan that violates the qualification requirements and is merged into another plan taints the surviving plan. Should you do a compliance audit on the other plan; obtain an indemnification from the other employer? There is no clear guidance on what would be sufficient to protect the surviving plan. In the area of rollovers, the IRS has published regs stating that if the receiving plan reasonably concludes that the transmitting plan is qualified, the receiving plan is protected if the transmitting plan is later disqualified.

Non traditional investments for pension plans

What creative strategies are there for putting current assets into my IRA?

Has anyone been hired as a contractor by his IRA? Is there anything special needing to be done?

If buying and selling real estate within an IRA, significant profits can be garnered quickly. What triggers an IRS audit of a IRA?

If you have had your pension plan invest in non traditional investments, such as real estate, mortgages, mobile home paper,tax leins, etc., could you express the pitfalls?

Which pension plan custodians administer non traditional investments, brainstorm strategies and help raise funds for their business minded pension plan clients from their other more passive minded pension plan cleints?

Where can I get good info regarding the Unrelated Business Tax issue?

The Demo 9 Instructions are asking me to provide the 415©(3) definition of compensation used in determining total compensation (for purposes of computing the individual ratios). The actuary is telling me that they used the W-2 definition BUT DID NOT INCLUDE DEFERRALS OR ELECTIVE CONTRIBUTIONS.

I know the 415 regulations intimate that your definition can exclude these contributions but aren't these regulations outdated and didn't GUST amend 415©(3) to specifically add these back in? And, wouldn't this apply to the TOTAL COMPENSATION determination under Demo 9? Does this mean, then, that the question of whether you have added deferrals into the definition of total compensation is a trick question on the Demo 9 and that stating NO would be cause for a bounce-back from the IRS?

I appreciate any response! Thanks.