GBurns

So will training and orientation trips. I had 1 case where the person attended a Trade show or two so as to see how it was done and also to get the opportunity to see products that would not normally be seen from both the employer and the competition. Since it was on paid company time and company paid travel it became services performed in the US and created other problems as well. It can be a very much a fact and circumstances issue.

But how can you count hours if there was no compensation? If no compensation, there was no employment status, so what documentation could there be? If there is employment status but no compensation How could she have been counted for WC etc? And if not counted, how could she be an employee? If an employee but not counted and reported for WC, UC, GL etc, What sort of problems for fraud etc might this employer be facing if he starts 'gaming" the documents just for his spouse? Once any documentation is created it might be difficult to keep it out of the other issues if anything arises.

Are you saying that this person never entered the US, did not do the work in the US, was not on a US payroll, has no citizen or immigrant status, but was a plan participant for whom employer contributions were made?

I was wondering what was "the truth"? Was it "That is absolutely OK" or was it "People do it all the time!!!"? Based on your personal experiences etc I guess it could be both in your case even if not for some of us. Since you are a fairly new poster, let me point out that not every comment needs or deserves a reply, unless, like some, you just cannot resist arguing a position to death. Like this one. Some posts are just to pull your leg, jab you in the ribs, or just to vent and are not personal, so do not think that some are attacks or belligerent even if they seem so. You will learn in time who is who (or whatever is correct) etc. But if you make a boo boo, expect to hear about it. When you make a boo boo, just fess up and move on. Yes, I did write this post all by myself, without any help or threats.

bruss Have you had a reply or spoken to anyone else at the IRS?

I can't think of why a Roth or any IRA would be even applicable to this lump sum that you are expecting. Is this money taxable? Do you need to shelter or defer the taxes? There are a number of questions that should be asked and answered before you make a decision. But I do not think that here is the place. IMHO you need a few advisors/sales reps/consultants (whatever you want to call them) who represent a large number of choices. Get their input then make your choice. It is not possible to advise you which funds or funds that you should use without knowing something about you, your finances, your risk tolerance, your targets etc etc. Anyone who pushes any particular fund or fund family without analyzing your facts and circumstances, should be regarded with suspicion.

As far as I know State governments and political subdivisions are governed by state law not by ERISA, but I do sometimes wonder if that is really true because some of the plan documents that I have seen very often make ERISA statements especially regarding claims procedures. Barring bad drafting, I wonder why include something that is not applicable, unless it might really be applicable?

I doubt that this is a non-resident alien? lvegas Is this a citizen or permanent resident who is no longer residing in the US or did you mean a non-resident alien who never had legal resident status but was a plan participant who made contributions and who now is no longer in the US? Or is this a beneficiary who does not live in the US?

A contract to build a house on land not yet owned?

It worked!! I am alive!! GBurns is back. I am sorry that I have to disappoint 2 readers who wanted gdburns instead. Thanks Dave.

insurbroker The medical plan is not the cafeteria plan and vice versa. I see these items confused very often. While there is no requirement for an annual enrollment for the medical plan, there is a requirement for an annual election for the employee's salary deduction agreement in order to deduct the employee's share of the premium for the medical plan and the FSA amount. There would be no annual enrollment if there is no employee contribution. How do they handle dependent coverage?

Don Levit As I said and as the Rev. Ruling points out, the amount that relates to the Cafeteria Plan is the employee's share of the premium, not the employer's.

That is the point. A provider is usually chosen based on what that provider is able to provide. When the choice is being made to use that provider, the gaps are known and provisions are made so as to supplement any deficiencies.

RTK Employer contributions are not paid through the section 125 cafeteria plans, only employee contributions. These are then (as per the IRC) treated as employer contributions. The choice to receive cash applies to the employee salary election.

Where did I say that an irrational decision was made? But you still have not explained what sort of information is missing. How to choose a Dr, hospital or other service provider? How to read a bill for services? Understanding ICD and CPT Codes? How to get a price quotation? Understanding UCR and network discounts? How to comparison shop? How to know what services etc are medically necessary? What are treatment protocols and guidelines? I could go on and on. The point is that There are many things that a consumer should know in order to effectively use CDHP, and the availability of that information should have been a necessary part of both the decision and the employee education. Not knowing what was given and therefore not knowing what is missing makes it impossible to fill the gaps.

kateinny's subsequent posts explained that this was through a Cafeteria Plan under which "Employees pay 60% of the medical insurance premiums and the employer pays the other 40%. In this case, the employer stepped in and paid 100% for the employee who was out on disability." So the employer is paying in lieu of the salary reduction from the employee.

Something is missing here. How could a rational decision have been made to change to these plans (HRA and HSAs) without the availability etc of this information having been considered and resolved? This seems similar to an employer getting a PPO or HMO based plan but not knowing what Drs etc were available nor what limitations and exclusions existed.

Are these clients the employers or the employees? If the employer has already adopted and implemented an HRA, What sort of information would you want to provide that would not already have been provided in order for the decision to have been made and the enrollment already done? What are youu seeking to do and What sort of information are you looking for?

Vebaguru What does a VEBA have to do with the issue? A MEWA is usually a MET and it is optional to use a VEBA but not necessary. Even if there was no mention of there being a VEBA, there was the possibilty that 1 existed, but, even if there was no VEBA there most likely would be a MET, hence Trust documents.

I always thought that termination procedures were included in the Trust documents.

Carol Writing I hope that you are not thinking that just because you have been unfortunately diagnosed with cancer, that you will either be fired, have to resign or will be denied coverage under your current employer's health insurance. There is no connection between the diagnosis and these items. If you are fired or denied coverage, you most likely will have excellent grounds for legal action etc. This comes to mind because I have run into cases where either the employee was fired or the employee felt that being diagnosed meant that they were no longer able to work. 1 person actually felt that she might spread her breast cancer to other employees. Another felt that she would be too weak to work and would have to take too much time off. So I have learned never to guess at what people think but instead ask first. Also get second and third opinions and see the actual pathology report yourself. The incidence of misdiagnosis is too great to ignore, regardless of what you think of the Dr. Remember not only is he human, but he is also relying on unknown others to tell him what they think that they see.

Colt3 Why HIPAA? Asking your question in this manner limits the responses that you will get. If it was possible that a State law (whether Civil Rights, Privacy or Labor etc), ADA, EEOC or some other law might be applicable, you probably would not get an answer because you prejudged and pre supposed that only HIPAA is or might be applicable.

I bet that you cannot get your office supply store to do that. Any merchant who tracks inventory through their invoicing system would find it impractical to do what you suggest. That is why your supermarket or large retail store scans in a return item even if you are doing an even exchange, the inventory control and re-ordering system dictates it. Paying the next medical bill does not help the ex-spouse to get back her money.

Yes but, the person paying the loan is not the person paying the medical expenses. And I do not think that "conversion" would be acceptable. Maybe an experienced tax practitioner will weigh in on this and the below analogy. The problem with the jsb example lies in the documentation, namely the check or credit card receipt that the ex-spouse used to pay the Dr. The Dr. now has "Paid" showing on the account and there is a hard copy showing who paid. Regarding the other jsb example, If I throw my $10 towards the restaurant tab but 1 of the party pays the full bill, I generally would not be able to nor allowed to deduct anything on my tax return even if this was a business lunch. Here is the analogy from Tax school. Jim has a dry cleaning service. Jim's girlfriend (ex-spouse, or otherwise) Jill has a restaurant. Jill is having cashflow problems and cannot afford to pay for the supplies that she needs to operate the restaurant. So Jim, being of kind heart, pays the bill from the supplier. Jill's restaurant cannot deduct this amount as an expense, because Jill's restaurant did not make the payment. Neither Jim nor Jim's dry cleaning service can deduct the amount as an expense, because not only did neither receive the goods, also neither incurred the expense and additionally it does not meet the requirements of Section 162 as an ordinary or necessary business expense. It will be treated as either income from the dry cleaning service to Jim or as a loan to a third party. You might now say that when Jill's restaurant repays the amount, then it will be able to deduct the amount as an expense. But that will not be the case, because there is no invoice to pay, no goods that will be received etc. It will be an expenditure but it will not be an expense.

The employee would be reimbursing the ex spouse for a loss/expenditure but it would not be a reimbursement of medical expenses. It is reimbursement of a personal loan.