Have a 15 participant 401(k) plan that is top heavy.

The plan sponsor has always wanted all employees to be eligible for the plan upon being hired. However, they recently hired an employee who will be a very highly paid HCE. This employee will have no company ownership.

The employee is currently eligible for the plan. Can they exclude this employee from participation prospectively? There will be no problems passing 401(a)(4) and 410(b).

Thanks.

Can someone discuss what may or may not be required for Cafeteria Plan to qualify as a Grandfathered Plan relative to a Health FSA within the Plan having to qualify as an Excepted Benefit; specifically the Availability Condition (requirement to offer Major Medical in addition to a Health FSA)?

What more might be needed than to document that the Cafeteria Plan was in existence on March 23, 2010 and make that clear to the participants?

Have come across several small employers who have offered a Cafeteria Plan for many years but cannot afford to offer Group Health and of course the Excepted Benefit requirement and Availability Condition now currently in effect.

Thanks

2 related corps each have fewer than 50 FT & FTEs for 2014 but collectively have more than 50 so they're ALEs for 2015.

We break the controlled group by changes in ownership this week.

Seems like they're still considered ALEs for all of 2015 (which as a practical matter just means they're required to issue the Forms 1095-C since they'll be "mid-size" for penalty purposes).

Anybody know of a way to make them not ALEs for 2015?

Thanks

Has this ever been legal?

If yes:

Any non-discrim testing?

Any change due to ACA?

OK to let each doctor choose pre-tax post-tax treatment (cafeteria benefit)?

Thanks

We have a client that has an adopting employer. The adopting employer will cease participation in the plan as of 12.31.2014. (Ownership will changed and no longer a controlled group).

The current plan is a definite safe harbor plan (3%) however the adopting employer does not want to fund it for their employees for 2014.

What are the repercussions for the plan if the adopting employer does not fund the safe harbor for their employees.

Even though the employer/plan sponsor will be funding it for their employees, it still puts the plan in jeopardy.

Has anyone had this situation? The adopting employer doesn't seem to care that the plan will be in jeopardy since they are going to be spinning off on to another plan starting 1/1/2015. Also because they have no association with the current employer going forward.

The actuaries and other math geeks will get a kick out of this.
http://www.tylervigen.com/

When does an employer notify an employee's dependent that the dependent's coverage will expire? Who gets the notification - the employee or dependent?

It is a self-funded plan.

Have a few DB plans that would like to increase benefits for most participants. If possible, they would like to execute the amendment before March 15, 2015 but have it effective as of 1/1/2014. Can this still be done?

Thanks.

If you have a new comparability profit sharing plan where each employee is in their own group. Can you provide an integrated allocation and not have to do the cross testing for the plan and only test the coverage? Are there any other issues or items to consider?

Hi group,

I'm a TPA of a 403(b) plan with multiple vendors and many terminated participants with account balances. Some of the participants are in individual contracts and it is a challenge to work with the vendors to pay those terminated participants with balances under $5K. Sponsor is wondering if they offer some type of incentive to terminated participants who take a distribution ( $100 gift card or the like).

Wondering what your thoughts are??

Thank you for any help/guidance you can give...

An eligible employee is deferring into the plan. This participant then moves into an ineligible class (He became a non-resident alien).

The employer failed to stop deferrals into the plan for 2013 and part of 2014.

In accordance with the concept of EPCRS my proposed solution would be to treat this as a minor operational defect. To put the plan back to where it would be if the defect hadn't occurred I'd propose wire the deferrals back to the participant and forfeit the match.

A major vendor has proposed treating this as a mistake of fact, with a correction that would forfeit the match AND the deferral and correction via payroll.

I can't get my head around that. Am I missing something?

We are in the middle of restating our 401k plans for PPA and realized that it has been a while since we restated our cafeteria plans. We don't administer any of them however we have our own and were wondering if we are required to restate that any time soon. It looks like the last update was at the end of 2012. An amendment to change the Health limit to $2,500. We've recently updated our forms for the $2,550 Health limit for 2015. But that's about it.

We currently administer a cash balance defined benefit plan in combination with a 401(k) profit sharing plan for an employer.

There are 5 employees in the 401(k) plan, 3 are non-owners, the other two are owners. All meet the age/service reqts.

Under the 40% rule of 401(a)26, the non-owners have been excluded from the cash balance plan and are included in the 401(k) profit sharing plan.

401(a)(4) testing has been passed on a combined basis.

For 2014, there is 1 new employee who is eligible, so obviously we have to add non-owners to the plan.

Now there are 6 employees.

How is it determined which of the non-owners have to come into the plan, or do they all come in at once?

I have a small business combo plan..husband and wife and a few common law ees.

there are children on the payroll who are 18 but not 21. Can I have them be eligible

for the profit sharing plan and not the db plan?. ..i.e.,reduce the ps eligibility age to 18 but not the db). My goal would be to improve the rate group testing by having them eligible but not benefit ..but I do not want to boost the count for 401(a)(26) and have more db participants. I do not need to include them for 401(a)(26) even though they are in the 410(b)/401(a)(4) testing..correct?

Is there an issue with setting up a plan for director's fees (paid on a 1099) when the individual also has W-2 pay from the same company? I don't think it's a problem but I have a faint recollection of prior discussions about it. There are no control group issues.

Plan has gone to prior year testing for the plan year ending 9/30/14.

Plan provides a prevailing wage contribution.

Employee A was not HCE for the prior plan year, but is for this current plan year. Employee A received a PW contribution in the prior plan year as well as the current plan year.

We have used some of the total prevailing wage contributions from the prior plan year to boost the ADP rate for this year. Do I need to increase Employee A current deferral rate by the current year PW contribution to determine if he is due a refund? Or do I ignore the PW contribution?

Sal's book states: "in the rare event that all or part of the HCEs QNECs are included in the ADP Test, it is the current year ADP test for which they are eligible to be included because the prior year testing method applies only to the contributions made by the NHCs".(chapter 11.205) What is meant by this statement "in the rare event that all or part of the HCEs QNECs are included in the ADP Test?" When are they included? When wouldn't they be included?

Thanks.

So I have a client who is turning 70.5 in December. He was a 5% owner until he sold his stake on June 1st of this year. Does he have to take a RMD (or MRD, this acronym seems to change with each source I research) in 2015. He has not separated from service, nor does he plan on it in the foreseeable future.

The IRS' proposed regulations lists certain fields that will automatically be considered as service organizations, even if capital is a material income producing factor, one of which is "insurance." Is an organization that is a licensed insurance company that is in the business of issuing insurance included within the meaning of the "insurance" field on that list? I am asking because an insurance company is buying less than 80% of a service organization, so there is no 414(b) or © affiliation, and they will satisfy the other criteria for A Organization ASG status, but the point is moot unless the licensed incurance company is a "service organization."

I've got a question on the maximum percentage amount of the paycheck that can be allocated to contributing to a 401(k) plan.

I was told by my company's accountant that not more than 75% of my paycheck can be allocated to my 401(k) plan (managed by Fidelity Investments). My question is: is there a federal law on such a limitation -- or this is just a company-invented rule? If this is just a rule, have anybody heard of similar limitations in other companies? What could be a reason for such a restriction?

Thank you.

When calculating for owners the tax benefit of their plan, do we include 401(k) in that analysis? I've always said "no" because more likely than not there is some level of 401k that can be done with no employer contribution at all. But if the Plan is top-heavy, I suppose the 3% is the cost of doing the 401k quite literally.

But it also occurs to me that I'll bet someone has done quite a bit of research on this analysis. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the large accounting firms has written something about this. If not, they should, because I have this conversation with clients all the time.

Does anyone have any info they can share?