Bill Presson

Frankly, in this scenario, I would recommend the client do the VFCP and the payroll company pay the costs.

For #1, I assume there will be a new LLC with a new EIN even though the name is the same. So you'll need to amend the plan to have the new sponsor take over sponsorship. For #2, The plan stays the same so this is correct. For #3, the plan isn't restated (maybe) but does need to be amended showing the new sponsor. The 5500 will file under the new sponsor EIN/PN and you'll show the old filing information under Part II, 4 (assuming 5500 SF). For #4, other than the amendment above, I don't see anything else needed.

Bless your heart, @Belgarath!

You'll likely have some future HCEs entering the plan then.

I didn’t see what the service requirement and entry dates are for the 401(k). Sorry if I missed it. But if it’s 1 year and dual entry, odds are pretty good you’ll know their HCE status by then.

Agree to read the document. It will include the sources from which loans can be issued. I’ll be shocked if Rollover account isn’t one of them. I would also be shocked if someone with a Rollover account isn’t included as a participant even if they haven’t met the eligibility for other sources.

Probably. Is that the case?

Money is fungible. The requirement is to refund out of his account. You don’t have to find the specific dollar that was contributed in 2023.

You need to contact your (former) employer. Doubt this board can help with that.

Oh, you sweet, summer child. 😇

Of all the “stuff” TPAs and RKs have to deal with from the SECURE acts, this is actually one of the easiest to implement.

They still have about 45 days, right?

First, I'm not an advisor so we are technically investment agnostic. The only advice we give is how the investment would likely impact the plan and actuarial calculations. Lou S. did a good job of laying many of the concerns.

I would think having a potentially volatile asset in a DB plan might not be advisable.

We do all the plan termination resolutions and amendments simultaneously and then proceed with distributions. Perhaps it can be done differently.

The plan has to be in compliance with all laws and regs when terminating. If they haven’t signed an up to date termination package, they shouldn’t terminate.

In-plan Roth Conversion (IRC) just means changing pretax money to Roth money. In-plan Roth Rollover (IRR) means the money was available to be distributed before the conversion. Many RKs limit IRCs to this type. In-plan Roth Transfer (IRT) means converting the money but it wasn’t available for distribution and you have to maintain the distribution restrictions of the money source. Many RKs don’t want to do this and have to track that many different sources.

Agree that I would likely bring in an ERISA attorney, but I would expand on Paul's comments regarding the financial institution. Ask them how they intend to make this right. They are the ones at fault here.

No

Because I like this answer, I'm going to assume it is 100% correct.

The deferral election had to be made by 12/31/2023 and the deposits for both sources made by the 2023 tax filing deadline plus extensions

True, but Terry Powers did specifically address this. From his slides: Participating Employer Plan Termination -No distributable event within the PEP -Establish new, single-employer plan -Transfer assets from the PEP to new plan -Terminate the new plan

😬 ETA - if I was the employer, I would want to know the exact reason for the bank’s issue. Because it might warrant additional investigation as to the appropriateness of continued employment.

Assume the termination date is 12/31 and you have a similar situation straddling that date. How would you handle it? Typically the check date controls when pay is considered earned and to what year it applies. Your plan could be different so you have to read it and the termination amendment. But if it was my client, nothing paid after 10/31 would count.

Roll Tide!