Does the Federal Truth In Lending information have to be in loan documents for participant loans?

Hi,

We are taking over a control group of restaurants that were formerly under a PEO plan. They said that this plan is only covering employees at their headquarters plus restaurant managers. Eligibility is 3 months of service.Is it possible to set up a plan this way and not include the other employees ie waitstaff,cooks, dishwashers, etc?

A plan's document allows for deferral changes to occur monthly.  As of January 2017, the plan was allowing for these changes to occur per pay period.  Does the plan need to amend the plan to allow per pay period deferral changes effective 1/1/2017?

Thanks

I have a plan where the two owner attorneys are dissolving their practice and setting up separate firms.  They currently have a safe harbor 401-k Plan.  One of the attorneys has told me she wants to maximize her contributions and she will be the only employee in her new firm (and possibly her husband) but she will have contract labor.  She has asked me if a SEPP IRA would be more practical than a 401-k and is she could roll the existing 401-k into the SEPP IRA if in fact that is what she establishes.  Is the maximum contribution to a SEPP IRA $54,000 like a 401-k/Profit Sharing Plan?  Would she be able to exclude the contract labor?  Could she transfer her 401-k account into a newly established SEPP?  Is a Plan Document and an annual 5500 required for a SEPP IRA?  Would like some opinions on what would make the most sense.......any response to these questions or input would be greatly appreciated.

This isn't a 409A question, but I can't find anywhere else to post a more general executive compensation question.

What type of service providers typically perform 280g calculations? Accountants? Attorneys?

We have always operated with the understanding that plan may simply pay out terminated participants with less than $200, of course with nothing withheld.  Does anyone have a reference we can cite authorizing the plan to do this?  We have plan trying to clear out old dead wood and several people have balances well below the $200. 

A participant was hired at a time when the Plan was immediate vesting.  The participant was gone for 20 years and rehired after a vesting change to a 2-25.  Participant left money in the plan and is the funds are 100% vested.

The question and debate is whether the employee is subjected to the new schedule of 2-25, OR, because she was originally hired under the Immediate, she is subjected to the immediate schedule.

We know her existing funds are 100% vested.  No issue there.

I lean that she is under the old Immediate schedule....

What say you? 

When should the document be effective?  My document has a box for PPA restatement, and I recall that this box invokes all of ther egulatory effective dates.  Should I restate effective 1/1/17 and let that box implement all the regulatory effective dates?

I am making some plan design changes, so would prefer a 1/1/17 effective date.

Profit Sharing Plan has 2 participants who are husband and wife, soon to be ex-husband and ex-wife.  Both have agreed not to request a DRO with respect to the other's PS account balance.  This is stated in the Divorce Agreement (not yet signed by both parties).

The husband has terminated service with the plan sponsor and has requested distribution of his AcctBal. 

In order for the plan sponsor to proceed with the husband's distribution, the plan needs assurance a DRO will never be presented to the Plan.

1. Would statements from each of the 2 participants, each irrevocably waiving the right to bring forward a DRO with respect to their soon to be former ex-spouse be sufficient, and if so, should it be a notarized statement or is a witness sufficient?
2. Also, if the Divorce Agreement were signed would it be sufficient on its own (thus no individual waiver statements needed)?

Thank you.

Many employers do not use health insurance for a health plan, and instead pay claims from the employer's general assets.  Some of these employers buy a stop-loss insurance contract to protect the employer (not the participants) against its risk of outsize claims under the health plan.

Can an employer do the same thing with a disability plan?  Is there a ready market for stop-loss insurance contracts regarding disability claims?

ESOP plan document of a c-corp provides for automatic distributions under $1,000 and automatic rollovers between $1,000 and $5,000.  Is anyone aware of any "small amount" exception (whether $5,000, $1,000, or $200) to the rule that ESOP participants are entitled to receive distributions their company stock account in stock?  It appears that the company is making all automatic rollovers of amounts under $5,000 in cash, and all automatic distributions of amounts under $1,000 in cash, and is not offering any of these participants the right to elect stock.  Recordkeeper indicates this is their common practice.  I tend to think that when they send these people the notices they should at least be telling them they have the option of taking the distribution in stock...  Plan document has a determination letter but it is vague on this point and doesn't explicitly say what the form of these automatic distributions/rollovers will be.

Appendix A, Sections .05(9)(a) and .05(10) of Rev. Proc. 2016-51 describe a safe harbor correction method for certain "Employee Elective Deferral Failures" -- which is defined as a failure to implement elective deferrals correctly.  The safe harbor correction method provides that if an error lasted less than 3 months and proper/timely notification is given to the employee, the employer doesn't need to correct the missed elective deferrals.  I'm comfortable that this would extend to a failure to implement a pre-tax or Roth contribution election, but I'm wondering if this treatment extends to catch-up contributions, too.  

We have a client that allowed a participant to take a distribution from the plan.  Participant is still working but is 65 so client thought they were eligible for a distribution.

In-service distributions are not allowed under the current provisions of the plan.  The document can be amended to allow in-service at normal retirement age now but this does not help the fact that a distribution occurred that was not permitted under the terms of the AA.  Can we do a retro-active amendment to correct this operational failure?  If so, does it need to be submitted under EPCRS?

I was reading through "Part-Time Employees Revisited"

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/qab_021406.pdf

The include Seasonal Employees along with part-timers, but they make it (I think) pretty clear that what they don't like is when part-time or seasonal employees are defined as employees who work less than X hours in a particular period.

But what if I have a group of employees who are being excluded solely because they work during the summer months exclusively without regard to how many hours a week they work.

I know I can exclude them; the real question is does the document (and operations) need to make them eligible if they hit 1,000 hours in 12 months (i.e. if they meet max eligibility under 410a)?

Employer terminating 401K 6/30/2017, no employee contributions after that date.

Can safe harbor for 2016 be made by 9/15, which is after the termination date w/o jeopardizing the plan term?

I was divorced in 2003. Apparently in the divorce settlement I agreed to pay my ex wife 50% of both my retirement plan and disability plan. I don't remember agreeing to the disability part but I wasn't in a very good frame of mind at the time.

She filed a QDRO in 2012 to have 50% my retirement sent directly to her (which I had begun drawing). Since that time the disability plan has been removed from the retirement plan specifically named in my divorce settlement and the QDRO. Since the disability plan is now different, is that QDRO still legally binding? I'm about to file for disability and found out the disability plan shows the QDRO as binding in the new disability plan.

Here is what the new plan says about older QDRO's established in the retirement plan:

"Qualified domestic relations orders received by the Retirement Plan
prior to January 1, 2015 that provide disability benefits to an alternate
payee under the Retirement Plan will be deemed to apply to disability
benefits paid under this Plan on and after January 1, 2015, to the
extent those benefits are now paid out of this Plan"

Here is what my ex wife's QDRO says about disability payments:

"The Alternate Payee (my ex wife) may only receive disability benefits when and if the Player becomes eligible to receive such disability benefits under the Retirement Plan"

I was never qualified or receiving disability under the old Retirement Plan, and therefore the alternate payee was not provided disability benefits. I'm waiting to hear back from my disability plan whether they mean alternate payees who were actually receiving disability benefits apply to benefits paid under the new plan, or if the alternate payee was in my ex's situation where she never received benefits because I was never qualified to receive benefits.

It will hurt if she gets half of my disability. She has remarried and owns two homes and lives in a great neighborhood and I have struggled for years because of my disabilites and would have been homeless if not for friends and family letting me stay with them. I was finally approved for social security disability just over a year ago and am guaranteed approval from my company plan because of that.

If anybody has any thoughts or suggestions I'd appreciate feedback?

the factor released for April was 244.524

the average needed to increase most of the limits is 244.5 so unless the consumer price index drops over the summer there will be increases in the comp limit and 415 limits

I suppose the crew in Washington could rewrite the regs to prevent this as well.

The Employer incorrectly reported $5,000 too much deferral for a HCE. We are removing the $5,000 plus the interest that was accumulated to make his account accurate. 

The over contribution we are using to reduce the next contribution that the Employer makes.

What options do we have for the interest.  (It's several hundred dollars)?

I had worked for a CPA firm for 17 years before taking a job in a different city.  The CPA firm recently terminated their pension plan and sent me a letter advising me of what my benefit would be and giving me the option to roll it over into or take a lump sum.  The amount was significantly smaller than I expected.  Upon talking to the actuary of the plan I was informed that my employer had frozen the pension nine years ago.  I have spoken to several employees and not one of them remembers being informed of the plan being frozen.  Does anyone know what actions we can take?

Company A just bought a bankrupt company's assets.  A new company is created out of the bankrupt assets: Company B.  Company B is a single member LLC owned by Company A.

The employer is wanting to keep Company A 401(k) separate from Company B 401(k) plan.  Easy enough to set up the new Company B 401(k) and move forward.

Both plans are going to be setup with same plan year ends and the same plan provisions.  The potential difference is profit sharing contributions per plan.  Plan A might be 5%, Plan B might be 0 or 2%, or whatever based on their own profitability.

If I understand this correctly, as long as each plan satisfies coverage (410b), each plan can do whatever they want for profit sharing.  Here are some numbers....

Company A:  Non excludeables NHCE 468, Benefiting NHC 426, Non excludable HCE 27 Benefiting HCE 25

Company B: Non excludeables NHCE 90, Benefiting NHC 80, Non excludable HCE 2 Benefiting HCE 2

Company A coverage: NHCE 426 of 558 equals 76.34, HCE 25 of 29 equals 86.21,  88.56% Passes

Company B coverage: NHCE 80 of 558 equals 14.34, HCE 2 of 29 equals 6.90.  207.89% Passes

1.  Is my math correct?

2.  If so, test separately, profit share each company separately.

Am I missing anything obvious?