Association was sponsoring a large welfare plan (medical), or seemed to be sponsoring the plan, for multiple members, but only one member group had over 100 ees. No 5500 filed for 2010 and 2011. Since 2012, members now contract directly with medical insurance co. - Who ultimately bears responsibility for the two missed years? Association may be interested in filing missed 2 years but they are not interested in paying the $4000 penalty, even though they understand the potential penalties.

Hello all,

I just re-entered the pension industry after 15 yearsand have alot of catching up to do. I also have a lapsed QPA designation that I can re-instate by completing 40 hours of CE credit. I am looking for Ilene Ferenczy book - Defined Contribution Plan Series Volume I: Plan Qualification and Compliance Basics, 5th Edition - and wonder if anyone has an extra one they no longer need? Or anything else that I can use to increase my pension knowledge?

Thanks in advance!

My draft DRO was deemed not approvable by the Plan Administrator. It is a private, non governmental, non Erisa 403 (b) defined benefit. To bring the order into compliance the PA demanded that that the date that I commence my plan benefit be changed from "the date on which the participant commences his or her Common Plan benefit" to "the Alternate Payee hereby elects either the last day of the month of ___, in the year ____ (but no earlier than the date that the Participant attains 58) OR the Particpant's Normal Retirement Date as his or her payment date. If the Alternate Payee elects a date that is before the earliest date stated in (a) or (b) above , the the Alternate Payee's payment date will be the default payment date. The default payment date for an Alternate Payee's benefit will be January 31 of the year following the year in the the Participant attains age 65 (or, if later, the last day of the the month the Order is approved.)

My first question is does IRC 414(p)4(A)iii apply to a non governmental non Erisa 403(b) defined benefit plan?

Thanks.

I have a client which is a partnership that sponsors a calendar year 401k plan. They are taking a 2012 profit sharing deduction which includes allocations on behalf of the partners & their employees. Since the partners' profit sharing contributions are deducted on their individual 1040s, do they have until 10/15/13 to deposit their contributions & 9/15/13 (the partnership return due date) to deposit the profit sharing contributions on behalf of their employees? Assuming the partnership's & individual partner's 2012 returns are on extension.

We discovered that a client of ours mistakenly deducted about $90,000 less than the actual contributions for his DB back in 2007 (Total contributions = $490k and deduction was $400k).

Q: Is the $90,000 in contributions that was not deducted considered a "non-deductible" contribution for the purposes of 5500/5330 reporting even if it was within the deductible limit?

We have an audit level plan that incorrectly calculated the match and deposited more than their formula for some participants. The plan's auditor is saying that this is an excess contribution requiring the payment of an excise tax on Schedule H of Form 5330. Since this had nothing to do with a failed ADP or ACP test, I don't believe that is correct. Where can I find something to show the auditor that defines the term "excess contribution"?

As the US District Court for the Western District of Washington recently stated in Palmason_v_Weyerhaeuser_Company

"In other words, a participant can not sue just because someone working for the defined benefit plan erred, that error has to actually cause the promised benefits of that participant to decrease."

Misconduct by the administrators of a defined benefit plan will generally have no effect on an individual’s payments under the plan. In order to establish the requisite personal injury to pursue an award of monetary damages, the participants in such a plan must show that the alleged breaches of fiduciary duty created an appreciable risk that the defined benefits would not be paid. In other words, plaintiffs must show that the challenged investment policy and other fiduciary breaches “create[d] or enhance[d] the risk of default by the entire plan.”

Thus, if an actuary makes an egregious error that upon termination is found to have resulted in a significant underfunding and the Plan is terminated under a distress termination, the fact that a participant may forego part of his benefit or option to lump sum may give him cause against the actuary. One would think that a miscalculation of an AFTAP leading to lump sum restrictions applying would also be cause.

It sounds like no foul, not suit. That is, if benefits aren't affected but the employer may have to put in unanticipated dollars, then that's no cause for employees to sue. Of course, if employer fails to fund, then there could be cause.

If an employer is going to change their plan year, will a grace period still apply to the short plan year? For example, the current plan year is June 1 - May 31, with a 2 1/2 month grace period. The employer changes the plan year to December 1 - November 30, so the short plan year is June 1 - November 30. Can a grace period still be added to this short plan year?

I can't find anything specifc to this in the EBIA manual. Thanks for any guidance.

another question under a different scenario...

Suppose the document is currently written - profit sharing allocation is integrated with social security with 1000 hours and last day rule.

Client wants to remove service requirements and change allocation method to new comparability.

Plan year ends 12/31. Can this be done now?

Our firm has been approached by a governmental entity to provide TPA services to their money purchase plan. Curious as to what type of services TPAs provide for governmental plans other than documents, distribution, rollover and compliance assistance? And do most governmental plans use TPAs?

The assets of Corp A were bought by LLC B. Corp A sponsored a profit sharing plan for man years. One of the shareholders of Corp A is a memeber of LLC B

One option is for LLC B to adopt the existing plan and keep it going.

One new owner suggests terminating the old plan and starting a new one to prevent LLc B from having any liability for any problems (not are expected) that might crop up for the previous years.

Any thoughts on what liabilities the LLC B might have? If a problem was found in any previous year, would sanctions be against the defunct former owner? Would the new owner have any responsibilities for mistakes made by the previous sponsor?

Company A wants to have a maximum match of 1% of pay. No problem. However, to receive the match, a participant must defer 4% of pay or more. For example, a participant deferring 4% or more of pay receives a 1% of pay match. A participant deferring less tha 4% of pay receives no match.

Can Company A do this? Thanks!

Can anybody point me to the citation for this rule?

Client wants "proof" that they can't do this

Thanks

We are a bundled provider with plan assets invested in a daily valued group annuity contract. Within the contract is not only a guaranteed account, but also a separate account that houses underlying investments (one separate account in which the plan may have 20 funds in which they have invested).

Do the disclosure regulations require a fair value report on the underlying investement within the separate account?

Our actuaries are telling us they do not have to provide that information, however we have had multiple auditors for our large filers that are insisting we do have to provide it.

Any help would be appreciated!

It has recently come to my attention that some of my Taft-Hartley pension plans were not amended for the HEART Act. I won't go into why as it's not really important right now.

My plans' restatement cycle begins February 1, 2014 and runs through January 31, 2015. I am planning on submitting them for restatements within that time.

I am going to have my non-amended for HEART plans pass amendments at their next quarterly meetings (all of them will be held before the end of 2013). I am then going to submit those amendments to VCP.

My questions:

1) If the amendments are passed by the end of 2013 and I submit to VCP by the end of 2013, will I qualify for the reduced $375 VCP fee (pursuant to Rev. Proc. 2013-12, Sections 6.05(3) and 12.03(2))?

2) Which schedule would I use when submitting to VCP? Appendix C, Schedule 1? Appendix C, Schedule 2? I'm thinking schedule 2 because these plans were not amended within the remedial amendment period. So, I'll just have to fill out the "other" box on the schedule and say that it was for HEART, etc. But, I wanted to see what you all thought.

Thanks.

Does anyone use it?

How do you like it?

Did you convert from another recordkeeping system? If so, was that hard?

participant has an IRA and a profit sharing plan. He is 75 and his wife is the owner. Can he satisfy the profit sharing's RMD by taking it solely from the IRA?

A large calendar year DB plan (150 participants) terminated and the sponsor purchased annuities covering 100% of the plan’s benefits in December 2012. After the purchase of annuities the plan’s trust balance was $0.00.

Of course, a week later a $200 dividend posted to the trust and was not dealt with until June 2013 when it was used to pay plan fees (balance in trust as of 12/31/2012 was $200).

We have no problem with preparing a 2013 5500, but I am not sure how we should be reporting the participant counts. I would think that technically the plan had no participants or benefit liabilities since the annuities were purchased.

Question – is it reasonable or even allowable to file a Form 5500 with a 0 participant count as of 12/31/2012 and still have assets in the plan? Going with the same thought, could we than file a final 5500-SF for 2013 showing zero participant counts as of 01/01/2013?

Any thoughts or suggestions are appreciated.

Just curious as to what others "typically" find that employers choose to do. Say you have a two owner corporation, or a two person partnership, and either the partners split to form their own separate businesses, or the corporation dissolves and both owners form new corporations.

It seems like it is rare for either person to do an assumption of liability and change over the plan to new employer name/id #. They typically just terminate the old plan and set up new plans.

I can see reasons why they would do this, but I just wondered if this is typical in your experience? Maybe the biggest factor is they just want a clean break with the prior business. Any thoughts on specific pros and cons that you have experienced?

Does the allocation of a forfeiture follow the same deadline as a regular contribution to the plan? Seems it should...