Does a QNEC contribution allocation need to be definitely determinable? Or, if the QNEC goes only to NHCEs, can the document not state the allocation formula, and state only that the QNEC goes only to NHCEs? The allocation if made to only NHCEs, cannot be discriminatory.

After receiving retirement benefits for 8 years the annuitant is advised that there was an error in the original calculation. In order to correct this overpayment the pensioner was advised that commencing on 10-31-00 there will be a reduction of $743.13 per month for 26 months. This represents a reduction of 22% of the full amount of $3362.64 per month. Restoration to $3362.64 will resume on 12-31-02.

Recognizing the length of time that has elapsed, can the Plan be enjoined from making the correction?

Best wishes,

Joel L. Frank

I am starting to see a lot of Heart & Stroke and Critical Illness policies being offered, both in and out of Sec 125 Cafeteria Plans. Has anyone heard of the reasons why the benefits are not taxable income? In particular the benefits that are not related to any expenses, such as the Dianosis Benefit and Home recovery Benefit etc.

This was a new design on me--trying to figure out if it can work. Forgive me if the answer's obvious.

Employer sponsors one big DC plan, with two components. First component is a profit sharing/safe harbor 401(k) plan, using the 3 percent nonelective contribution. All employees eligible. Second component is a money purchase plan with a 4 percent contribution--only the owner/sole HCE is eligible. Assume this is being treated as one plan, even though two components.

Is it permissible to test the money purchase component and the profit sharing component as a single plan under 410(B)? If not, how does the money purchase component pass coverage?

In a 401(k) plan with a loan provision and policy that is being utilized by participants, can an employer revoke that loan policy? In order to cut down on administration and expenses, the employer would like to disallow future loans while allowing existing loans to be repaid according to the amort schedules.

An employer owned by group of professionals is setting up a new defined benefit plan. (It already maintains a defined contribution plan.) Prior to drafting the plan document the board of directors polled the professionals to determine who wanted to participate in the new plan. No formal election regarding participation was ever offered to the professionals. However, those who expressed the desire not to participate were specifically excluded from the plan by name. The board of directors, which includes all of the shareholder/employees, determines the compensation of each employee each year. However, in practice, those who were excluded from the plan will receive more cash compensation from the employer than those who participate even though no formal agreement to this effect exists. Is this a cash or deferred election under Regulation Section 1.401(k)-1(a)(3)?

In a 401(k) retirement plan that allows post-tax (voluntary) contributions, do all ppost-tax contributions have to be a payroll deduction?

In other words, can John Doe cut a check from his personal checking account, mail it off to his HR Administrator, and ask that it be contributed to his individual 401(k) account.

If I have a University employee who participates in an ERISA 403(B) plan and also has self-employment income, must I consider his 403(B) contributions when calculating his maximum deduction for his own DB plan? I think no, as long as the 403(B) is an ERISA plan.

We have a client who did not pay the Company profit sharing contribution to the plan before the extended due date of the tax return due to an inadvertent ocersight. The contribution was deducted on the Company's Form 1120. According to the rules, in order to deduct the contribution on the current year income tax return, it must be deposited by the due date of the return, including extensions. Is there any lenience with this rule? The IRS has chosen this particular year for audit and we are concerned they may disallow the deduction.

Also, does anything happen to the participants' accounts due to this administrative error? Does the money stay in the plan or does it all have to be refunded?

A plan participant elects to defer $100 per month in a calendar year FSA. As of May 31, the participant has incurred $1500 in expenses and has requested reimbursement for $1200 as allowed under the plan (he is out $300). The participant and his wife have a baby in July and wish to increase their deferrals under the change in status rules. The participant would also like the increase his deferrals to help defray the $300 he previously could not claim. Are there any regulations that would prohibit him from doing so? In other words, can a participant revise his deferral estimate to account for expenses incurred prior to the date of his change in status?

I am at a point where I feel I need to not only learn current pension law, but also know the history and evolution of US pensions.

First, I need to be aware of all the Acts and legislation that has been passed over the years.

Then I need to know the highlights of what changes to pension laws resulted from each Act or legislation.

Then I need to decide which Acts, etc. I need to get a copy of and how or where I could obtain them.

For eg. a summary of all Acts could look something like this (just for sample purposes only):

ERISA 1974

TEFRA 1982

DEFRA 1983

REA 1984

TRA '86

You get the picture.

My question is how would you suggest I go about this endeavor?

Thanks much.

Gary

Does anyone know if a health plans' network pharmacy can add a fee onto filling a prescription - and that fee is not reimbursed by the insurance company? For example, the pharmacy charges $2.50 for each prescription it fills. The pharmacy is also trying to collect back fees and charging the individual 1 1/2% interest??

When there's a dispute about who is the proper payee of qualified plan benefits, people often mention the idea of interpleader. My understanding, albeit limited, of interpleader is that the holder of the funds (the trust) deposits the disputed payment into the court, and the competing payees fight over who gets the money. My question is about tax consequences and reporting: is this a distribution from a qualified plan? If the funds are held by the court, aren't they no longer subject to the tax protections of the qualified plan rules? Is the distribution taxable if not rolled over within 60 days (which I assume it wouldn't be, given the amount of time necessary to resolve the interpleader action)? Who gets the 1099 (the premise of interpleader is we don't know who the proper payee is)? Maybe you can argue not taxable to the payee until the court resolves the interpleader, but how does the plan resolve the reporting issue? Does it also wait until the resolution of the interpleader? What if minimum required distributions have to be made?

In the case of a partnership of professional corporations we have the following scenario:

- The partnership adopts a cross tested psp

- Each professional corporation(one shareholder only; the doctor)adopts the plan as a participating employer.

- The plan defines the president of each corporation as a separate class. The partnership employees belongs to a separate class also.

Question: is there any way to avoid this arrrangement to be deemed a CODA in the case each adopting employer(prof corp) wants a different allocation?

Thanx for your input

401(k) and match portion's eligibility requirements are immediate entry, enter on the first day of the quarter following his or her date of employment. Profit sharing portion requires one year of service and age 21, enter on the first day of the quarter following completion of the requirements. Suppose for the 2000 plan year that an employee was hired on 9/15/2000, he enters the 401(k) and match portion of the plan on 10/1/2000 but he will not enter the profit sharing portion until 10/1/2001. The plan is top heavy for the 2000 plan year. It is my understanding that this employee would be eligible to receive the top heavy minimum contribution for the 2000 plan year, correct? Suppose that the 401(k) and profit sharing plans are actually two separate plans, would this employee also be eligible to receive the top heavy minimum? Also, suppose the employer had a previous plan that terminated and was top heavy. New profit sharing plan was established the following year. Wouldn't the new plan be top heavy?

Does anyone have a copy of the 1993 GAM Table, for males and

females? (1993, not 1983)

I cannot find it. I'm having trouble using The Society of Actuaries mortality table feature, although it appears that this table isn't listed in their tables, anyway.

If you've got it in text or excel formal (or a link to the actual q's), I'd appreciate it.

Thanks

Can an employer of less than 20 employees, and which offers group health coverage that coordinates with Medicare (i.e., pays only what Medicare does not pay, for Medicare-entitled individuals) simply terminate group health coverage of active employees and their dependents who reach age 65?

The small employer exemption from the Medicare Secondary Payer Act says that Medicare can be primary payer for eligible employees, but I don't think it also creates an exemption from the ADEA as far as who gets offered benefits. . . .

The previous third party plan administrator of a governmental plan qualified under 401(a) as a discretionary profit sharing plan and as a alternative to Social Security under 3121(B)(7)(F)has not distributed benefits to terminated or promoted employees for several years. Will the fact that several thousand former employees have not received their benefits, and are now likely non-locatable effect the plan's qualification under either circumstance?

Does anyone know of a survey on stock options? I'm in a 3-year-old software startup and trying to research how many options we should be offering to employees with varying titles and seniorities, as we set up our stock option plan.

Any advice from personal experience, or info on where to find stats on this, would be very appreciated.

Thanks,

Liss

We are implementing a severance pay plan and would like to provide severance for 3 Dutch citizens working for our company abroad. There are specific Dutch laws which may control the severance given to those employees. How do we handle them under the Severance Plan? in light of the fact that we are granting fullest possible discretion to our plan adminstrative committee, do we include those employees as eligible for severance, but exercise discretion so they get only Dutch statutory benefits? Or can we exclude them completely? Title VII and other federal employment laws do not apply to foreign nationals working abroad for a US company, although they do apply to US citizens working for US company abroad. Thanks in advance.