K2retire

Larry, I agree. George, if you pay your staff well enough that a payment on a $20,000 loan would not make a noticeable difference in their take home pay, where do I send my resume?

It is unfortunate and certainly enough to make anyone angry. But the fact that you did not notice that no loan payments coming out of your check is NOT the fault of your employer or the firm administering the plan. The paperwork you received should have told you the amount of each payment. When your paycheck continued without being lowered by that amount, you should have inquired about it. P.S. I just noticed your name is the same as someone I used to work with. Is the employer in question a magazine publisher? If so I might have some tips on dealing with the individuals involved.

To answer your final paragraph, in most cases current employees cannot withdraw money from an employer sponsored plan just because they think they can get a better deal elsewhere. If it is a 401(k) plan, they can certain choose not to invest any of their own money in the plan. But that will mean forgoing any employer matching funds.

It's an auto correct feature, but I don't know how to turn it off here.

I am not qualified to answer any of your legal questions, but perhaps this sequence of events will help. Step 1. Local divorce court agrees to modify the terms of the original DRO (or not) Step 2. If the judge issues a new DRO, then the plan administrator determines if the new order is qualified (or not) Step 3. If both of the above happen, then your current wife can take action to claim that the ex wife's claim interferes with her rights. So, until steps 1 and 2 are completed, there is no real action for your current wife to take. Your best option would be for a divorce attorney that you hire to persuade the judge NOT to sign a new DRO. Focus on that for now. Good luck!

John is correct that they may have been wrong to put you into the QDIA. I'm not surprised that they did, because it is often impossible for the service provider to tell if someone is in the money market fund because they actively chose to be there or because it was the default for someone who never made an election. The employer or other plan fiduciary should be able to tell and instruct the investment folks accordingly. Finding a financial adviser is not an easy task. Start by asking people you trust for recommendations. Interview candidates, and ask up front how they get paid. If they get paid by the companies they recommend to you, then you can be certain that will color their recommendations. You want someone who is unbiased. That will probably mean you have to pay them an hourly fee for the work they do for you. Good luck!

Fixing it may be easy, but agreeing on HOW to fix it is not.

It sounds like your new provider's default fund is a Qualified Default Investment Alternative. That is something relatively new that the Department of Labor has provided for as a better long term choice than a money market fund. Unfortunately, for the past few months the money market would have been the better choice. If you had attended the meetings, or heeded the e-mails, you might have been able to choose a money market fund instead of the stock fund. You should be able to make a switch going forward, but that may not be the wisest choice in this situation. You need the help of a financial adviser who can help you understand your options.

Thanks for the great info!

After all my years in this business, my brother has now come to me for advice on a subject that is foreign to me. His estranged wife was a Postal employee and has money in the FERS program. I know that the Federal government doesn't follow the same rules that they require of the rest of us. Can anyone give me some tips about the key differences between a typical QDRO and one with FERS?

Unless, of course, you meant that part of the correction was going to be a retroactive amendment to the plan followed by filing for a D-letter, as outlined in EPCRS.

Check for the distribution timing provisions as well. It is relatively common for pooled accounts to say that the distribution is made after the end of the next plan year.

I know it doesn't seem fair, but until the court order was issued, your ex was under no legal obligation to do anything about the investments in the plan. Although following your suggestion might have been the honorable thing to do, it is rare that people who are getting a divorce are concerned about doing the right thing for the sake of the person they are divorcing. Be sure to consult a tax adviser as well. You will owe taxes on the QDRO amount unless you role it into an IRA. If you are turning around and giving most of it back to him to buy out his share of the house, he will receive it tax free from you. That sounds like a horrible deal for you. In most states there is no rule that each individual asset must be divided -- just that there be a division of property. Giving up your share of his 401(k) in exchange for him giving up his half of the house might be the better deal for you.

As I recall, it was also an attempt to see whose room (among the 3 from the same employer) could run up the highest mini bar charges. Does that count as a test in practice?

If prototypes are supposed to be designed to always pass 410(b), and an employee opting out could cause 410(b) to fail, it makes sense that no prototypes could have that option. I remember seeing it in the Corbel volume submitter document, not the prototype.

Keep in mind that the stock market overall has gone down for the period you mentioned. Hence Bird's comment that breaking even would be doing a great job.

...a subject discussed at length with some of my colleagues while attending a Larry Deutch symposium a few years ago.

Wouldn't you also need to pass 401(a)(4)?

Although I don't know the reason used on the application, my former employer got a D letter on the termination of his DB plan after only 2 years. And since he is a TPA, I would expect the IRS to hold him to as high a standard as anyone on that issue.

The first year of a plan using prior testing you are allowed to assume 3% for the NHCE prior year.

You said earlier that you can not afford an attorney. With spousal support and your pension as things that you already know he's trying to take (plus your 1/2 of your house, cars, etc. that will no doubt come up later) you can't afford NOT to have an attorney. Keep in mind that all of those things he's requesting go both ways. So if he now has a pension, a house, etc. you should be asking that they be considered in the property settlement. And you may be entitled to support payments as well. By the way, how have you managed to file tax returns all these years without knowing his whereabouts or his income? California has some really unusually laws about how to treat income and expenses when you are married, filing separately.

Am I hallucinating that there used to be something that said the plan administrator was entitled to rely on a written representation by the employee as to the hardship without requiring any proof unless the employer had actual knowledge to the contrary?

Simplest from the plan's perspective, yes. Now try getting the partnership to agree to it....

Start by looking in most any adoption agreement in the "allocation conditions" section. It will describe the requirement to have 1000 hours of service to be eligible for an employer contribution in a year. Notice that this is a completely separate part of the document and a completely separate issue from eligibility. In simple terms what these provisions are trying to tell you is that once you've met eligibility, you're in the plan. But after you're in the plan you may have to meet additional conditions each year to be eligible to receive an employer contribution for that year.