I have a plan that has held a life insurance policy for only 4 participants for many years. They would like to terminate the polices, just get rid of them and take whatever the value is to themselves (they want the cash). Our record-keeper is telling us that in order to cancel the policy they HAVE to deposit the funds into the plan and then follow the plan document as far as being able to actually take the funds themselves. In this case, you have to either terminate employment or be 59 1/2 take a distribution, per their plan doc. However, we were told by the outside insurance agent that they could take the cash and be taxed on it, as normal.

I just need guidance on how to get a life insurance policy out of a plan - when the participant is under 59 1/2 and still employed?? It is possible, right??

TIA!

Just a matter of idle curiosity - now and then, in a QDRO situation, an attorney includes the entire divorce decree, or draft decree, or whatever it might be called. This is the exception rather than the rule, but it happens. I was wondering if this violates any sort of privacy rule, client confidentiality, etc.?

It isn't that I mind receiving them - in fact, they sometimes make for fascinating reading - I've seen some crazy, zany, entertaining, humorous, and sometimes incredibly sad stuff. Just wondering if it is allowed, or technically a no-no? 

I am the alternate payee (ex-wife) I have been divorced since 2007. Recently my ex husband and I had QDROs completed, agreed upon and signed by the judge in 5/2017. One the retirements was deferred compensation. Our QDRO was very specific and stated that I was entitled to 50% of the marital portion including gains and losses until the time of distribution. Everything went through smoothly and the money was distributed into a separate account for me. I ended up obtaining 33K in gains. Now the ex husband is upset and stated he didn't realize what he was agreeing to. He is upset about me receiving the gains. He and his attorney recently filed a motion to modify the QDRO to remove the provision of losses and gains, and for me to return the 33K back to the former husband. It is now 9/2017, 4 months later. Do you think a judge would reverse this being that there was no error and all parties originally agreed at the hearing in 5/2017? And what would I need to do in this case.

We have a plan that has Roth deferrals and participant loan options.   2014 was the first year of Roth Contributions for Participant.  In 2016,  Participant took a $1500 loan from the Roth source, (before meeting “qualified” status).     The record keeper allocated the loan payout between the Roth basis and earnings pro-rata (reducing Roth basis).  example:  $1100 Roth basis; $400 earnings.

The participant terminated nine months later, in 2017.  The loan balance was paid down to $450.   The record keeper did not increase Roth basis for any portion of the repayments, so the distribution will tax the original loan amount including all principal that had been paid off.  

By taking the loan, the participant will be taxed on the entire amount of the loan, including the amount attributable to Roth, regardless of loan repayments.

Is it correct that there is Roth basis adjustment (decrease) for the loan withdrawal but no  Roth adjustment (increase) for any portion of the loan repayments?
 

OK, it looks like I have a plan sponsor that thought their document didn't allow deferrals off a bonus, when the plan document (both the current PPA, prior EGTRA by us and the EGTRRA from Ascensus, their prior tpa/RK) says that there is no special election on the deferrals off bonus.  The current PPA allows for a separate election if the participant chooses.

I don't know how far back this misunderstanding of the document goes.  How do you correct this kind of operational failure?  I don't know the specifics of bonus, as the client doesn't report that separately to us.  The HCEs at least for last year was the owner and his 2 children.  None of them made more than $265k.  The owner has the highest comp and it was below $150k.

Thoughts?

Are IRS approved nonbank trustees and custodians allowed to issue certification of assets for a limited scope audit?

Company A is being acquired by Company B. One of the terms of the acquisition is that A's 401(k) plan must be terminated the day before the acquisition closes. (So far, so good -- they actually planned ahead!) Company A will cease to exist following the acquisition and most employees will transfer to the Company B payroll the following day. 

Company A pays in arrears and will have a final paycheck for work done before the acquisition a week or so following the acquisition.  Because the final paycheck will be after the plan termination date, I have always understood that it is not eligible for deferrals or employer contribution calculations. Company B's TPA insists that it is because it is payment for work before the plan termination. Even if the elections below were changed, I don't believe that would apply in this situation.

Have I been mislead by multiple employers and their ERISA attorneys all these years?

How can I definitively determine whether a church plan is a 403(b)(7) or 403(b)(9) account?  As far as I know, for the client in question, all of the plan assets are in mutual funds on the American Funds platform.   The existing plan document does not reference investments.  To be an RIA, it seems that you have to specify this in the plan document, but there was not an option to specify this is our plan document, although there will be with the updated pre-approved version.  Can this RIA designation be made elsewhere, such as in the service contract with the investment company?  Also, if the plan only allows employees to invest in mutual funds with American Funds, can it still be an RIA?

I have a client who is considering purchasing annuities for some of the retiree group.  Their attorney says a plan amendment is required.

i have been trying to find this answer, would seem like others have had this situation but I can't find a thing. if you have a 401k plan with safe harbor and no employees want to participate do you have to pay the 3% or can you say you are doing the 4% and since no one is deferring, there is nothing to contribute ???

and if you had just one NHCE, you could do 4% for them and you would satisfy the requirements?

I hope this makes sense

thank you so much!! 

I am swirling in a little confusing.

We have a employee that is in two unrelated plans that we administer.  Because we administrate both plans, I can see that he deferred 24,000 in Plan A, and 350.00 in Plan B.

My original thought was to distribute the 350.00 as a 402g error and be done with it.  (We did email the employee and let him know the error)  But, being the deferrals are in two unrelated plans, am I needing direction from the employee?  What's the deal with the March 1 deadline in the plan document?

What if I never knew the 350.00 deferred to Plan B?  I'd move forward like normal....

Do I cut a check for 350 plus earnings, issue 1099-R for 2017 and be done with this?

What are your thoughts?

If you have a corrective amendment completed after the IRC 412(d)(2) election period (2.5 mos after PYE), you cannot use the corrective amendment on the Valuation for funding but can still/must correct the discrimination testing by the 11(g) deadline (9.5 mos after PYE). On the Form 5500 if the corrective amendment brought in an additional participant to pass testing do you show a different higher participant count on the Form 5500 than you do on the Schedule B ?  Any problems showing a different participant count on the Form 5500 than the Schedule SB ? Thanks in advance.

Looking for your professional opinions...a plan has company stock as an option in their 401(k) plan and realizes the fiduciary responsibilities around it. They are considering limiting the percentage an employee can contribute to stock and some other possibilities. However, the stock has always done very well and they are proud of it. The question is in their annual company town hall meetings, the CEO usually shows some information on how well the stock has always performed, how much they would have if they invested $100 in it 25 years ago, etc.  Could this be considered 'promoting' the stock as an investment in the 401(k) plan? He doesn't specifically mention that the stock is available in the plan during these meetings, but we're wondering if there should at least be some kind of disclosure language included in his future presentations. Any opinions are appreciated.

Good morning cyber friends!

I have a quick question for you to help clarify something I've come across in my DC 1 book. It is in the Plan Amendments and Terminations section (Chapter 10) and deals with nondiscriminatory amendments. It goes on to say that the establishment or termination of a Plan is treated as an amendment. A subsection of the establishment of a Plan says that there is a Safe Harbor for past service credits limited to five years. "If a Plan amendment credits years of service for past periods to determine benefits, the amendment is deemed to be nondiscriminatory if no more than five years of past service is credited, the past service is granted on a reasonably uniform basis, and the service can be taken into account under service crediting rules of TR §1.401(a)(4)-11(d)(3).

Say what?!?!

Does this mean that a start-up Plan can only credit prior years of service for vesting benefits for the prior five years, or is this talking about contributions based on service (not applicable under a 401(k)/PS Plan)?

The example in the book talks about establishing a DB plan, but the book is about Plan Qualification and Compliance, and a 401(k)/PS plan is a qualified Plan...

I guess I am looking for clarification on how to apply this correctly.

Thanks in advance!!!

We have a forfeiture balance of approx 60K @ 12/31/16 (Plan A)

We are merging this plan into a parent company plan (Plan B) effective 1/1/2018

Current forfeiture balance in Plan A is about 190K. I have suggested in reducing forfeiture prior to merger by  reducing matching , plan admin fees, allocation to participants (current Plan A order of forfeiture alloacation)

But what about the 62K as of 12/31/16- there was certainly enough employer match & plan admin expenses to reduce the forefeiture balance at 12/31/16 to zero!

Can we use this 62K toward 2017 employer match /amin expenses or must we allocate to participants as of 12/31/16 base on their Comp to total Comp

Much thanks!

Lexy

Hi,

I quit my previous employer in May 2016 and requested to Roll over my 401k to new emloyer plan in June 2016. They sent me a check which i failed to deposit in my new 401k . in Jan 2017 they send me a 1090R with column 7 as G direct rollover. later in Aug 2017 i requested them to send me another check so that i can rollover they send me a check less 20% tax addressed to me. I called them to correct it so that i can do direct rollover but they are claiming that the date has passed .

what options do i have now . i did not take the money and it is my fault to delay it this long. can i be able to get the tax refund and also avoid the 10% penalty if i can open a new IRA .

Please advise

Anyone having a long wait for support at Relius?

Have a 401(m) plan, looking at eligibility requirements.  Plan sponsor is composed of approximately 60% full-time hires and 40% .4 FTEs or less (most of this group are .01 or .1 FTEs).  Sponsor would like to set eligibility as follows:

Age: 21

Minimum Service: "employee regularly works more than 20 hrs per week"

Initial eligibility would be determined by employee FTE at hire date (per employment contract).  If .5 or higher - eligibility would be met and employee would enter next payroll period.  If employment contract is for less than .5, employee would be ineligible unless worked more that 1,000 hrs in plan year.  In this case, employee would enter next payroll period following the completion of the year of service (e.g. 1000hrs).

Looking into whether the service requirement (and eligibility procedure) would meet 410(a)(1)(A).  Relius - the plan document provider - says yes, as the procedure would identify employees meeting the 1,000 hrs requirement and would include them in the plan (and therefore meeting 410(a)(1)(A)).  But I'm slightly uneasy as I haven't seen any precedent for this procedure.

Welcome any thoughts.

Are there any regulations regarding the allocation of EE 401k (pretax) and 401k Roth ( after tax) contributions on the paycheck that an employee reaches their annual IRS limit of $18K or $24K if catchup qualifies?

If the EE is contributing to both pretax and post tax 401k plans and maxes out ....is there an obligation to apply all employee elected contributions for that pay period to the pretax 401k plan first? By obligation, I am referring to legal requirements by the IRS or any other institution?

I would assume that whatever 401k EE election % was used would be applied in this situation and it is possible that a person reaches the annual combined 401k/Roth 401k limit of $18K w/out all EE contributions being applied to the pretax 401k limit first.

Is there a standard methodology for applying pretax 401k and after tax Roth EE contributions as they reach the annual IRS limits?

Thank you,

Linda A