ejohnke

We have a new plan we are setting up as profit sharing only in 2025. They will be adding deferrals/SH Match effective 1/1/26. In an effort to stream line things, can we add this in the initial Plan document (indicating that the CODA portion isn't effective until 1/1/26) or do we need to do a separate amendment to add this?

Thank you for the insightful responses. In this specific case, the plan only has 4 participants; two owners, a spouse and 1 unvested employee. The participant in question is actually one of the plan fiduciaries. His wife is in a memory care facility and unable to cognitively sign the spousal consent form. He has power of attorney for all medical and financial decisions. The participant and his wife only have 1 daughter (whom he wants to list as his beneficiary) and he has already established a trust to care for his wife if something happens to him. Upon reviewing the Plan Document, it appears to give discretion to the Plan Administrator.

I have participant who would like to name his daughter as his primary beneficiary on all retirement plan related accounts. The participant's wife is so impaired she is unable to execute a spousal consent on the beneficiary designation. The participant has Power of Attorney for all purposes regrading his wife. Is this sufficient for the spousal consent section of his beneficiary designation?

Looking for some guidance...In 2023, the IRS added Part VIII "IRS Compliance Questions" to Form 5500-SF. We are filing a late 2021 Form 5500-SF using the DFVC program. Since we have to file this on the 2024 Form 5500-SF, do we need to complete these questions that didn't apply to the Form 5500-SF in 2021?

No additional limit like the 6% for Safe Harbor Match, correct?

Are there any regulations limiting the amount of compensation used in a fixed match formula? We have a client wanting to do a match of 100% on the first 6% of deferrals, then 50% on the next 2% of deferrals. Thus allowing for a 7% match on 8% of compensation.

Thanks for the input. I understand that this isn't an ideal situation, but we are trying to work with the client and get as many of their "wants" into the document as possible. This Plan historically has had low turn over, and no LTPT, due to the nature of their industry. They are on a platform that is tracking initial eligibility and we are tracking/allocating their integrated profit sharing allocations for them. Since the profit sharing allocations only happens at the end of the year, I don't expect a significant increase in administrate work. Most times the new entrants will either receive a Top Heavy allocation or a profit sharing allocation.

Is it possible for a Plan to use different subsequent eligibility computation periods for different money sources? For example, a Plan would like to do 1 year of service, with 1,000 hours, for the deferrals and safe harbor match, but do 2 years of service with 1,000 hours for profit sharing. They would like to "switch to plan year" to calculate subsequent eligibility computation periods for deferrals and safe harbor match, but use anniversary of hire to calculate subsequent eligibility computation periods for profit sharing. Is this possible? What additional testing would the Plan be subject to?

Can a participant have a racehorse as an alternative investment in a 401(k) Plan? A participant would like to purchase part of a racehorse using their 401(k) account and then hold the ownership in the Plan as an asset. Other than keeping all of it "at arm's length" and watching for obvious prohibited transactions and possible Unrelated Business Income, is there anything preventing this type of alternative investment from being held in a 401(k) Plan?

In this case deferrals were not withheld. What happens when we add an auto enrollment layer to this issue? The auto-enrollment wasn't initiated by the custodian until 4/1/24. In order to calculate the 2/1-3/22 MDO, what deferral amount(s) would we use?

We have a new plan, effective 1/1/24, with deferrals effective 2/1/24. There were SIGNIFICANT delays with the Custodian and deferrals couldn't actually start until 3/22/24. What is the appropriate way to correct this issue?

I have received a copy of their plan document and it looks like they need to give 30 days notice to the lead employer of their intention to withdraw from the MEP and they are free to establish a spin off plan. Are there any issues doing this mid-year? Can the spin off plan have a 1/1/24 effective date with deferrals starting 7/1/24? How are the two partial years handled for 5500 purposes?

We have a potential new client that is unhappy with the MEP that they joined 1/1/23. They would like to leave and become a standalone plan. How does a plan leave a MEP and become a standalone plan? Is this possible to do mid-year?

We have a client that was using a Custodian that allowed for participant loans to be repaid using ACH. The Plan permits a terminated participant, making payments via participant ACH, who has elected to defer receipt of a final distribution, to continue making scheduled installment payments on the participant's outstanding loan. When the Plan document was restated as a Post PPA document, the ACH/terminated participant repayment loan provisions were not maintained. Since 1/1/22, the Plan has not been operating in accordance with their written loan policy. (They continued to allow for ACH/terminated participant repayment because it was never their intent to remove this provision. The Post PPA loan policy change was a Scrivener's error.) We are thinking about doing a retroactive amendment to return the ACH/terminated participant repayment loan provisions to the Post PPA document. Is this an appropriate correction? It almost seems too straightforward. Am I missing something?

When a Plan chooses to allow brokerage accounts, is it acceptable for the Plan Sponsor to expect the participants to get them a copy of the statement(s) at the end of the year? Should the Plan Sponsor be receiving a copy of each individual statement monthly or at least quarterly? What are the consequences if they are not keeping copies themselves?