Does anyone know if the required 2013 annual participant fee disclosure comparative chart - the distribution deadline for which was extended to 18 months by FAB 2013-02 - is still required for a plan that is merged into another plan before the deadline for providing the comparative chart? If so, can you provide a citation/source for the guidance on that particular issue?

Thanks!

We have a Governmental Trust Authority that has a 457 with deferrals and loans and a 401(a) with match. The Trust Authority oversees a Tax Exempt Hospital with a 403(b). How do we handle employees moving from one employer to the other? From what I've been told, the Trust Authority appoints the board of trustees for the hospital.

A plan sponsor must submit Form 5310-A to notifiy the IRS when electing QSLOB testing. They must also submit a 5310-A when they revoke such testing.

Does anyone know if filing 5310-A requires the plan sponsor to test on a QSLOB basis? For instance, if the plan sponor files a 5310-A for the 2012 plan/calendar year - but they test coverage and nondiscrimination on a total group basis, ignoring the QSLOB designation, is that okay?

Obviously, testing on a total group basis is allowable (as long as corrections are made timely). But if this was caught in an audit - would the employer be required to re-do their testing on a QSLOB basis due to the fact that they submitted at 5310-A?

From what I'm reading in 1.414®, it appears that filing a 5310-A requires that QSLOB testing be done, and testing on a total group basis would not be allowed.

Thoughts?

A PSP [calendar year] wants to add here in 2013 an EOY employment requirement to Plan. Plan has a 1,000 requirement. Deep in the recesses of my brain a little bird said...whoa--not so fast....any thoughts on this...is it doable.

We are looking into a client management system, as well as a workflow system for our TPA. I've herad about PensionPro, NexusTPA, Pension Portal (EBG), and I hear that FT WIlliam has new software coming out.

Ultimately, we are interested a some sort of a client portal and workflow system that would track time, track where we are on a plan, etc.

I'm curious to see what systems others use and how it's working out?

Can medical expenses be withdrawen tax free from HSAs which were expenses incurred in past years which were not deducted due to being under the 7.5% threshold for the medical expense deduction even though expenses above 7.5% were deducted in those years? Also, can medical expenses which were not allowed because of high income limitations on schedule A deductions be withdrawen tax free?

I know that the method of allocation has to be defined, and I understand this to mean that basically you can't allocate money willy-nilly between different people.

I also understand there are a variety of ways that it can be defined, including a flat amount, a percentage of compensation, or employee classifications.

Can someone clarify whether there is a list of approved methods, or if it can really be anything that is "bona fide" and well defined?

Also, can the classification be something as specific as, say, a particular officer in a corporation?

I have a one-person plan, effective 1/1/2011, which bases compensation on comp prior to 1/1/2011. When calculating the 415 comp limit, do I include comp after 1/1/2011?

Any help would be appreciated!

has anyone had recent DOL service provider audit experience? what does it involve? any insights?

Would appreciate jist of a case study where a private institution of higher learning subject to FAS #106 set up a trust to level cost of tuition assistance provided to retired staff and faculty to aid them in paying for tuition of children, for example:

• Can it be done legally
• What guidelines are there on setting trend assumption for cost increases in tuition
• What investment restrictions are there?

Thanks much,

Ira

As I understand it, when valuing mass withdrawal liability one uses the ERISA section 4044 mortality and interest rates. Should the expense loading factors in Appendix C also be used?

I work mainly with mutiemployer defined benefit and welfare plans, so this is probably a basic question. I noticed on a multiemployer 401(k) plan that some employers may not be paying FICA and FUTA on elective deferrals. It also appears there is no withholding for the employee portion of FICA and FUTA. It is my understanding that elective deferrals are subject to FICA and FUTA and the employer and employee must pay their respective shares. It appears that some employers contributing to the plan are paying FICA and FUTA on the adjusted gross income of their employees (i.e., the employers are not paying the FICA on FUTA on the deferrals) and the employee portion is not being withheld from the deferral amounts.

Am I correct that employers must pay FICA and FUTA on the deferrals and that paying FICA and FUTA on on the adjusted gross income is wrong? What about the employee portion of FICA and FUTA? Should that be withheld from the deferral amount?

Any help would be appreciated.

I am in a situation where I was laid off today and my company hasn't deposited the safe harbor contributions for 2012 let alone 2013. I assume that I am entitled to the 2012 contribution and a prorated 2013 amount but I am hoping somebody can confirm that. As of now I haven't head if the company will honor either or both of them but if they are true to their past they will not honor them.

Any help would be appreciated!

A colleague of mine and I are disagreeing over a plan's ability to provide a disproportionate match as a Safe Harbor contribution.

A disproportionate match, defined at 1.401(m)-2(a)(5)(ii), occurs, generally, where an NHCE receives a match that is greater than both (a) 100% of deferrals and (b) 5% of compensation. So, for example, a match of 200% up to 3% of comp would be fine until you defer past 2.5% of comp (at which point the contribution exceeds 5%).

Generally, the consequence is that the disproportionate portion is ignored for testing purposes. Because only NHCE amounts can be disproportionate, it's meant to prevent trying to game the ADP/ACP test with weird matches.

Here's the issue: In defining a safe harbor match, 1.401(m)-3(j) says the contribution will only be taken into account if it meets 1.401(k)-3(h)(1), which, in turn, says the contribution needs to meet the requirements of 1.401(m)-2(a), which of course includes our friend the disproportionate match rules. The implication, then, is that you couldn't have a safe harbor matching formula that could produce a disproportionate match.

However, there doesn't seem to be any other support such a position. There's been no guidance that I can find on the interplay one way or the other. In all the articles/resources on permissible safe harbor matching formulas, nobody's mentioned the disproportionate match rules as an issue. Further, in laying out proposed safe harbor matching contributions, a number of the big-name providers have included formulas which would run afoul of the disproportionate match rules. Of course, none address the issue explicitly.

Has anybody ever heard of this analysis? Have you dealt with safe harbor formulas that may trigger disproportionate matching contributions?

I'd appreciate input on the following two issues:

1. In determining whether the payment of deferred compensation on account of a service provider's death is late, which of the following taxable years is the correct point of reference: (a) the service provider's taxable year; (b) the estate's taxable year, which begins on the date of death; or © the designated beneficiary's taxable year?

2. If the payment is late, and assuming that the service provider was an insider up until death and that the designated beneficiary was a non-insider, for purposes of correction under Notice 2008-113, are you still subject to correction under the "insider" rules or, because the service provider was no longer able to influence the payment date can you correct under the "non-insider" rules?

Thanks.

Plan has discretionary match. Formula being used is dollar-for-dollar up to a max $40/week, based on hours worked but capped for deferrals made. Examples:

Joe works 36 hours and contributes $50 in deferrals. He receives a match of $36.

Bob works 15 hours and contributes $10 in deferrals. He received a match of $10.

Don works 45 hours and contributes $100 in deferrals. He received a match of $40.

Performing a BRF test on this match on a weekly basis - some weeks pass, some weeks do not. Document is silent as to how to correct this - would it be as simple as providing additional match to those who did not receive as much as the HCE in the same group? Or could we look at this differently and do it on an average basis instead of looking at each week individually? (HCE A averages 32 hours/week for the year - they compare that to the weekly average for the NHCEs)

Opinions, please!

Earlier this year, I saw that the proposed federal budget included that $3 million cap on retirement plan benefits for wealthy individuals. While I would assume it to be unlikely that the final budget would include this provision exactly as currently proposed (or if at all), I was wondering if anyone knows when the budget must be finalized - I was thinking about when this could come into play.

Thank you

HOw is the requirement in 2550.404c-5(d) satisfied for a plan sponsor managed model portfolio? For example, in the case of a balanced fund, is the requirement to describe the investment objectives, risk and return characteristics met by simply identifying the componenet funds and their proportionate investment?

A Plan allows two participants into the Plan early. Both participants (HCEs) contribute employee deferrals. The employer refuses to correct the error. Is this a prohibited transaction? Would they need to check Yes on the Form 5500 that the plan had a PT during the year?

How common is it for a plan document preparer to not submit for a Determination Letter? Individually Designed Plan had a prior DL which expired and though IDP was restated timely, no DL was requested. What if the plan needed to file a VCP?