GBurns

Since there are other reports that are less optimistic, I guess that we will all have to wait and see how it pans out by February 2006. By the way, employer interest quite often does not translate into employer adoption.

JanetM I must have misunderstood the post, so let me ask you, What does a defined contribution plan sell to participants that would make it an investment company or which would be a security? Better yet, I am curious as to why you did not bother to respond to anything in any of the posts but instead resort to a personal attack? If you understood and/or agreed with the post why not respond or address that?

On the other hand you might want to start understanding what 401(k) and defined contribution plans and how they operate. Also, Why not post this on the other Forums such as the 401(k) forum where you should get some more responses.

I have never seen a 401(k) or any pension or retirement plan sell or offer interests in the plan. I have never seen any plan with interests to sell. I have never seen any of these plans offer any form of security or offer anything other than participation. I have never seen or heard of any plan that sells "interests" in a fund or fund of investment assets. Where did you see that "The securities laws treat a participant's interest in a qualfied plan as a security" ??????

Without better criteria and some idea of what is required, it would be hard for anyone to do rationally. In any case I would prefer that your recommendations come from those with more hands-on experience. My experiences are more from the sales side and not enough from the operational/problem resolution side, and so would not benefit you. But, I do know enough to say that 1 of your chosen firms would never be on any list that I make up unless my client was super large (200+ participating Executives). Aside from lack of cost effectiveness, complexity of user interface, some firms just do not have the mindset to handle small clients.

What "interests" exist and who owns them? How do you make a connection between an investment company and a MEP? What securities, and what sale of securities by whom, exists in a MEP?

On the other hand, Do you want a recordkeeper whose "system" is set up for NQDC Plans, but who has not had sufficient variations in designs, participants, problems etc to have "learned the ropes" and who might, for other reasons, be lax in compliance and service etc ? Having the alleged "bells and whistles" does not mean competence nor does it mean that the service will be valuable too you. It could be that the "Value added services" are of more value than the actual "system".

What you are really saying is that there are a lot of agents selling a "pie in the sky" package to a lot of people who have no idea whether they could complete the package or not? In simple words, they were buying (sold) a HDHP in order to put the premium savings somewhere somehow if they ever find a place to put it and if not then they would just enjoy the lower premiums and pray that they do not have anything catastrophic or would not have major out-of-pocket expenses while not getting the promised tax break. Because of your phrasing ... "I GET 30 CALLS A DAY FROM PEOPLE ..." I have to ask if you have a vested interest in setting up HSAs and financial interest in Great Lakes HSA ?

I am curious as to how you arrived at these 2 choices? Having a large number of plan participants because of having a few clients who are large employers only makes one have a large number of participants. It does not denote competence and does not necessarily make one a "big player" (unless head count is the only criteria) and it definitely does not make one a "best player".

"There are thousands of companies, state and federal workers that now have HDHP coverage." But the majority are not HSA eligible anyhow. What do the USPS and most of these many thousands of employees have, for example? An HDHP with HRA. Having a HDHP is not the sole critieria for having an HSA. What do you think most HRA users have as insurance coverage? An HDHP but 1 that is not HSA eligible.

Isn't also taxable when from a Q plan?

In a nutshell, Yes. Although I think that you meant that it was the non-employee spouse who should elect to be covered under their employer's coverage.

What is the Plan definition of "compensation"? Which is/are the Plan Sponsors? Why is there an AFSG?

Income does not flow because of attribution. Stock ownership does not affect W-2 income. Partnership income flows to the partners which are Corporations B and C. If B and C are S Corps only then would the results of the total operations of Corps B and C flow through to the shareholders. LLC should make no difference.

Whereas I would just get as much possible from all sources. 100% of whatever I can squeeze. Let the other party squirm and object if they can. If I can get 100% of the house because of the children's need for shelter, then I still want as much of the rest as possible Q and NQ for support, repairs whatever. Why limit my thinking to taking 50/50, 75/25 or anything else first? I can easily negotiate down but I have very rarely seen anyone negotiate up very much.

There are big differences. In the cell phone scenario there is an actual monthly expenditure by the employee that is being reimbursed. The use of the cell phone is also for the convenience of the employer and so are the related expenses. The employee is also able to substantiate the expense and does so in a timely manner. With the small tools, the tools are part of the employees "dress" or working conditions as mentioned in the CIP. The tools are what the employee uses to do the job, no different from the salesman's pen. In the cell phone scenario there is no recharacterization of income, only a reimbursement of an incurred expense. In the cell phone scenario there is no pre-taxing of anything.

Why would a distribution of the NQ assets to another party be subject to claims by creditors of the plan participant and/or their plan sponsor/employer? Once split and disbursed to the other party, there is no claim that could be made that I can think of other than those related to fraudulent transfer, bankruptcy or Medicaid look back, none of which should be applicable anyhow. I would not think that a spouse who looks at assets and sees House Equity $ 120,000; Checking account $3,000; IRA $20,000; 401(k) $200,000; NQDC/SERP/Stock Options etc $ 400,000 would be rational to take 50% of the Q assets and leave the NQ because it might cost a few $ for a lawyer to get an unencumbered amount. You fund the settlement with whatever and as much as you can get.

The client is probably just following what the majority of carriers are doing in response to state Privacy Laws. All the BCBS, Aetna, UHC etc have or are in the process of discontinuing using SS# as an identifier on documents and cards. This change should be completed by the end of 2005. Here is a BCBS news release: http://www.bcbsil.com/producer/whatsnew/social_security.htm

I have never seen a way to pre-tax this. Even assuming that the tool reimbursement program works. What would the mechanic be pre-taxing anyway? Using an accountable plan would only apply to newly purchased tools that have not already been deducted (section 179, depreciation etc) under a previous year's tax return. So it should not be applicable to old in use tools. It should also be impractical to use an accountable plan for small tools. And as the IRS points out in the CIP, restructuring the compensation would not work. What has the promoter been able to give as legal support that is relevant? Most of the IRS etc determinations that allow such arrangements involve large items definitely not hand tools or small tools.

STLGiant, See the post by Locust. In any divorce or property sharing situation, it is only sensible to look at ALL assets. Until ALL assets are looked at, the total value cannot be determined. That is what asset searches are for. Without identifying and quantifying ALL assets, How can a rational decision be made regarding sharing/splitting? In many cases NQ assets will be more than Q Plan assets. It seems foolish to just look at Qualified plans only. It seems foolish to worry about what is "easier" without knowing the value. "Safer" is irrelevant. That is what lawyers are for.

I wondered what benefitsnerd meant because of the use of the phrase "Family Status Change" which, to me, implied a legal dependent hence family member and also that it was under section 125 "Change of Status" rules, rather than any other situation especially since there should be a problem with most carriers etc otherwise.

JanetM, If you are correct, then there are even more questions. For example, "can the employer cut his hours so as not to pay the benefit for the remainder of the year?" What does "pay the benefit" and "remainder of the year" mean? And there still is the isuue of being "only liable for 4 months of the company compensation " Liable? Compensation? ********************** CheiAnn , Do you have a copy of the SPD and have you looked at the Plan Document? What do they say about FSA claims submission after termination? Were any claims submitted? If No, Why not? If Yes, Do you have a denial letter? The denial letter should have instructions for review or appeal, which should also be in the SPD.

"I realize the employer is responsible for the full yearly benefit on the first day of the plan year" Where did you see this? What benefit are you referring to? "the employer is stating they are only liable for 4 months of the company compensation (Jul,Aug,Sep,Oct). " If this employee worked November to February, weren't they paid? If this employee was paid for the part time hours worked from November to February, What compensation are you referring to?

It should not be an eligible benefit under section 125. What do you mean by "provide"? Who pays? What do you mean by "supplemental unemployment benefits" ?

benefitsnerd What did you mean by "dp's"?