52626

Plan states loans are due an payable at termination of employment Participants can not continue to make loan payments after they terminated The cure period for one term participant ends 3/31/2020 and 6/30/2020 for another participant The CARES Act states if the due date occurs during the period beginning on the date of the Act and ending on 12/31 the due date shall be delayed for one year. Questions- 1. Are these participants eligible for the 1 year delay? 2. Does this mean their cure period is 1 year from the 3/31 or 6/30 date? 3. How does the plan document and requirement that loan payments by terminated participants are not accepted impacted by the CARES Act. Lay-offs, furloughed participants can they continue to make loan payments, or will the document need to be amended to allow for these payments.

In 2017 and in 2018 16 employees were allowed to join the plan and defer before meeting the eligibility requirement ( 7 in 2017 and 9 in 2018). The client was told the document provider would draft an amendment to bring these 16 into the plan. An amendment will be done for each plan year listing the employees by name for the respective year. Vendor said this will correct the problem. Here is my question - isn't this one time amendment a "corrective amendment" and therefore had to be adopted by 10/15/2018 (for the 2017 plan year) and 10/15/2019 (for the 2018) Plan Year? Can the plan just adopt the amendment now to correct the eligibility errors for the past two plan years. What am I missing??? Thanks

1. Loan procedure has the standard cure period...... last day of the calendar quarter following the calendar quarter ...... 2. Loan procedure states loan will become payable in the full on termination of employment 3. Employee has an outstanding loan and terminated 7/10/2019. Question: Does the loan become due and payable (taxable since the employee can not pay it back) as of the termination date. Or does the plan sponsor have to wait until the end of the cure period (12/31/2019) to default the note? thanks

Good Afternoon All - Participant took a loan 2 years ago ( 5 year note) and has been making payments as required via payroll deduction. Participant has told the employer she can not afford the payments and to stop the withholding - she will default on the loan. 1. The loan program requires payments be made via payroll deduction until the loan is paid in full Can a participant just stop their deferrals? Seems to me, if the employer allows this employee to stop, they have opened the "black hole" for others to do the same. Some how the IRS would have to view these as sham loans - done as a way to get funds not otherwise available. Doesn't stopping the loan payment cause the loan to violate 72(p)? I have read some states mandate if the employee tells the employer to stop a withholding, the employer must stop. Even though this is contrary to ERISA. Thank You for Friday afternoon help!!

Normal Retirement is currently 65. Participant did not make the special 3 year catch up election in time. Can the employer amend the plan and increase NRA to 70.5?If so, would the increased NRA apply to all participants ( including existing participants)? This will allow the employee to make the special catch up.

Company A sponsors a Safe Harbor ( 3%) auto enrollment plan. They recently purchased another company via a stock purchase. Purchased company is also a Safe Harbor (3%) auto enrollment plan. They intend to merger (not terminate) the acquired company's plan into Company A's plan. Trying to figure out if merger can occur mid year, or if it has to wait until 1/1/2020. Thanks you.

Participant submitted a request for a hardship to purchase primary residence. The Buy/Sell Agreement lists the buyer as his wife. The mortgage will be in the wife's name. They are "legally married and will live together in this house. Question - although the house is in the wife's name, can the participant take a hardship for the expenses incurred regarding this purchase??

As a practitioner in Florida, is it your opinion failure to pay the stamp tax does not result in a prohibited transaction and or operational issue?

Florida imposes a document tax on loan transactions that are made, signed, executed, issued in the state. Before you ask, why would a Plan Sponsor care, the loan is under a Qualified Plan ( and ERISA), the Florida statue specially states that "promissory notes made in connection with a pension plan loan, 401(k) loans and share loans" ARE specially included. Failure to pay the stamp tax, could result in a state courts inability to enforce provisions of the promissory note. It has been suggested failure to pay the tax could mean the 401(k) is extending loans that are not adequately secured and could result in prohibited and/or operational failures. Seems everyone I have spoken to about this matter is aware of it but no one is enforcing the stamp tax. Obviously the recorkeepers are not doing anything on their end and TPAs processing loans, state it is not their responsibility. Ironically, the TPAs I have spoken with do not address the stamp tax with their clients. Since the loan is issued under the regulation set by ERISA, could the State of Florida come in and challenge the loan? While the plan followed ERISA guidelines with issuing the loan, not sure why some feel there is a prohibited/operation issue if the stamp tax is not paid. For group who deal with Florida clients, are you recommending they file the payment and have the loan recorded with the state? Or is everyone just sweeping this under the carpet until the first major blow up occurs!!

Participant terminated 12/31/2018. In March of 2019 he told a lump sum payment and rolled his benefit to his new employer's plan. At the time of distribution he had an outstanding loan balance. The recordkeeper issued two 1099Rs, one for the rollover and one for the offset loan amount. Under the Taxs Cuts and Jobs Act does the participant have until 4/15/2020 to fund the "outstanding" loan amount to an IRA or his new employer's plan as a rollover contribution? Any restrictions on funding the outstanding loan balance by the due date of tax return?

Currently the plan makes all match contribution each payroll period. However the match is based on annual comp/deferrals - aka a True Up. The employer wants to change the match to a payroll period only. No true up. Can this change be implemented mid year? Thank you.

1. Effective 9/1/2018 company a acquired a group of employees from company b 2. The plan was amended to allow the employees employed on 9/1 would be eligible to join company a's plan immediately. 3. Payroll is twice a month. 4. Due to some payroll issues, deferral withholdings began with the 9/30 payroll. Match is made each payroll period. 5. the plan makes a true up at year end. Question. Must the plan include the wages earned for the first payroll (9/15) even though deferrals did not begin until 9/30? Needless to say if the 9/15 wages are included in the true up, these employees will have an additional match due. Although the document has an effective date of 9/1 since deferrals could not begin until 9/30 is there is issue if the 9/15 wages are excluded when determining the true up match???

Employer acquires a company under an asset purchase There were several individuals that were paid 1099 by the prior employer. Under the new employer these employees will be paid w-2 wages. Eligibility for the 401(k) and match is immediate. The question is regarding vesting and if the new employer can recognize service for vesting purposes. If the employer credited service for vesting, he would have to list each individual as a sole proprietor, correct? The new employer would need to get the effective date of the sole proprietorship in order to determine the years of service. Does this make sense?? Are there any issues with giving vesting service credit to this group?? Thanks

Company A and Company D are an Affiliated Service Group Company B and Company D are an Affiliated Service Group There is no common ownership between Company A and Company B I understand Company D is included in the testing for Company A and also for Company B. Here is my question, does Company A and Company B need to be tested together? Does the ASG between D and these to entities require them to be tested together? Is there an issue if eligibility/benefits under A and B are different? If I read one more thing about ASGs I think I will scream. Having a root canal is better than figuring out ASG rules!!!

Eligibility is 18 and 1 year of service - immediate entry date Computation period changes to Plan Year if service is not met during the initial computation period ( date hire to date of hire). Hired 4/1/2017 As of 3/31/2018 - employee did not complete 1,000 Moves to Plan Year 1/1/2018 - 12/31/2018 Question - as of 7/10/2018 employee completed 1,000 hours, does the employee enter 7/10/2018 or does he wait until the close of the 2018 year end and enter on 1/1/2019. Does the determination of the 1,000 hours get done after 12/31 or when they are actually met? Thanks

Company A will acquire Company B in an asset purchase ( company B will now be Company C). A and C will be a controlled group. Company A has a safe harbor match. company C wants traditional 401(k) like they had before the sale. 1. As long as they each pass coverage independent of each other they can have their own plan correct? Company A 10 HCEs 50 NHCES Company C 5 HCES 35 NHCES 2. Does Company C's traditional match have to be the same as the match for Company A? 3. Does Company C have to vest 100% immediate like Company A or can they maintain a 6 year graded schedule? Client really wants to keep Company C on their own.

I assume you mean the 180 day waiver period?

Employer has a Money Purchase Plan. Participant named her children as her primary beneficiary and the spouse consented to waiving his rights. The employee has now terminated and wants to take a distribution. Does the participant's spouse have to consent to the payment? Since he waived his rights when he signed the beneficiary form, does he still have to consent to the distribution? I am thinking the beneficiary waiver does not apply when a distribution is requested. Thoughts Thanks

Participant enrolled and deferrals withheld and timely deposited. In September the employee reached $18,500. Payroll stopped his deferral. The participant was over 50. Due to a payroll glitch, the catch up contributions were not withheld. In January the employer realized the error. They have corrected the payroll issue. Any action required by the employer for these "missed" deferrals? The employer does not make a match contribution.

501(c) maintains an ERISA 403(b) Plan ( deferral and employer contribution). they are considering a move to a PEO. 1. The PEO sponsors a 401(k) Plan 2. The PEO recommends terminating/freezing the 403(b) and adopting the 401(k) Nothing prevents the employer from maintaining their 403(b) correct? The employer is not required to adopt the PEO's plan, correct? Thoughts?? Thanks

THANKS!!

Way way back in November of 2010 DOL issued proposed regs on TDF is this matter still hanging out there?. I can not find that these regulations were ever finalized. Am I correct??

Company A has a 401(k) Plan - On March 1 of 2018 they were purchased by Company B ( no prior relationship). This was a stock purchase. Company A terminated their 401(k) Plan February 27, 2018. All assets were distributed by June 2018. My question is in regards to who signs the 5500 for 2017 and the final return for 2018. Isn't the prior employer of Company A responsible for the 2017 filing. Since this was a stock acquisition, and the payouts and final 5500 are processed after the stock acquisition, is Company B responsible for the filing. Or does this responsibly still fall to the prior employer of Company A. Getting conflicting info from all the parties, so I thought I would ask the "experts"

Section 13613 of the TCJA amended § 402(c)(3) of the Code to provide an extended rollover deadline for qualified plan loan offset amounts (as defined in § 402(c)(3)(C)(ii)). Any portion of a qualified plan loan offset amount (up to the entire qualified plan loan offset amount) may be rolled over into an eligible retirement plan by the individual’s tax filing due date (including extensions) for the taxable year in which the offset occurs. Question - Am I correct in saying the new guidance extends the time participant can rollover the value of the offset loan? The participant is not rolling over the actual loan to the new retirement plan and making loan payments? core assets rolled over $40,000 - paid 9/18/2018 Offset Loan $10,000 Participant would have until 4/15/2019 to deposit $10,000 to the account. This would be earmarked as a rollover.

Participant terminated 1/2/2018 and was 72 at the time of termination. Not a 5% owner. Under the RMD rules he could postpone his first RMD until 4/1/2019. If he did, he takes a second RMD in 2019 for 2018. The participant rolled his account balance to an IRA on 5/1/2018. The IRA custodian is now telling the participant he had to take his first RMD before the funds were rolled. The 401(k) recordkeeper is saying he did not have to take the RMD before rolling the funds. I do not agree with the recordkeeper. I say the participant HAD to take the 2018 RMD before the funds were rolled. The first RMD is technically for 2017, the second is for 2018. Even though he could postpone the payment until 4/1/2019, the rollover to the IRA triggered the RMD. Need some help in understanding what and when the payment needed to be issued. To complicate matters, the Rep from the Recordkeeper said when they spoke to the IRS about this matter, ( called the 800 number) IRS rep told her the funds did not have to be returned to the 401K trust and paid. The payment could be made from the IRA. Anyone else have issue with this response?