ERISA1

Thanks Peter. Fortunately, this Sponsor did not have investments with Couture. Couture has not been banned from the TPA business. His website is still up and running (though email is not). I would expect his TPA work could be bad, but some records, especially plan documents and census records, are better than nothing.

The shut down must have happened in 2020, because the 2019 work was completed. CWM even prepared a restatement effective 1/1/21, so they were probably in business until the 2nd half of 2020. I think many clients were waiting for CWM to complete 2020. The owner was in the investment business. He must have had employees performing TPA work. Perhaps if we keep on posting this query will become more prominently featured for all of its activity. I am just getting started with the search for CWM's files. I can start posting on other social media. I just know that BenefitsLink is the best place to get started.

Thank you. I saw the article too. Shocking! I figured there ought to have been other clients and advisors who would have found replacement TPA's 2 years ago, when the arrest first happened, and that one of those TPA's is a subscriber to these Boards. I appreciate your response very much!

Hi - We are trying to provide TPA services to a plan that had, until 2019, been serviced by a TPA called CWM Retirement Plan Services, LLC, in Massachusetts. They have not responded to our communications in any form. I now understand that they were shut down quite suddenly and dramatically. It seems clear the owner is not available to provide any information. Is anyone aware of how we might be able to obtain records that had been held by CWM Retirement Plan Services? For example, did another TPA take over their files? Any help or information will be much appreciated.

Hi - I am speaking with someone who is hurting from having been taxed on a deemed distribution due to failure to an an installment by the end of the cure period. I don't think it can be corrected because payment was made after the cure period. However, I think I can offer him some consolation by suggesting he repay the loan and make a Roth Conversion of the repaid balance. There won't be tax on the conversion because he has "basis" in the funds (i.e., the money has already been taxed). I am concerned however about whether there is a restriction against converting this type of after-tax money. I can't think of a reason, but I am paranoid. (After all, I work in the pension industry.) The literature only speaks of tax-free conversion of 'after-tax contributions'. Repaid deemed loans are after tax, but they have a kind of moral taint for failure to repay a loan. Does anyone think that this type of after-tax money cannot be converted to Roth? Assume that payment was restored to original sources (e.g., Profit Sharing, Pre Tax Elective Deferrals, Rollover account), and assume the plan allows conversion of vested funds held in any account. Any problems? Thanks

I just heard from FT William. They say I should draft the restatement exactly as Belgarath suggests above. Thanks Belgarath.

Thanks! I am trying not to load up the document with a lot of piecemeal effective dates. You mention 1/1/22 as the main effective date. Do you think that date is critical in any way? Ultimately, I can satisfy the client's communication objective by drafting the Summary Plan Description to say it reflects the design as of 8/1/22. Still, I dislike having to specify a bunch of interim effective dates, especially because my (FT William) document does not specify specific effective dates for the many provisions that must take effect before 1/1/22 (or 8/1/22). (Perhaps you can tell that I am fishing for someone to tell me than an 8/1/22 effective date is OK.) Thanks

I have a client that wants to introduce significant design changes effective August 1, 2022. This is one day after the deadline to "adopt" Cycle 3 (Post PPA) restatements. If the document is signed prior to 8/1/22, but effective one day after the adoption deadline, would you have any concern that the restatement is not timely? I think not, but I will appreciate your thoughts, and hopefully, citations. The question of Restatement effective dates comes up all the time. For example, most of us are drafting Cycle 3 restatements with effective dates that are later than the earliest effective date of changes made in the document. For example, a lot of documents are being drafted with 1/1/22 effective dates for laws that took effect in 2018 and earlier. Clearly, there is a deadline to sign the document on or before 7/31/22, but does anyone know of a requirement that documents specify earlier effective dates? It seems the only requirement is to sign before the end of the Remedial Amendment Period, on 7/31/22. Thank you very much.

My company, The Retirement Advantage, can help and has very competitive fees. I can introduce you to our Regional Sales Consultant in Southern California. Send me an email if you would like to speak: David.Danziger@TRA401k.com.

Might this be an Affiliated Service Group under IRC 414(m)(5)? I doubt the former employer or new consultant would want this outcome.but it could put a spin on all of the responses in this thread.

I have found that PPA documents don't include adequate provisions to clarify effective dates for specific laws or individual client designs. My sponsors document only says it is intended to to satisfy the requirements of the 2012 Cumulative List. Is anyone doing more than relying on general provisions in the document? Thanks

You could create a separate plan if it can pass coverage, However, cost will far exceed benefit if all they are trying to save is a match for an occasional NHCE.

ERISA Section 105 requires benefit statement to include a statement of "vested percentage of such benefits (or the earliest date on which benefits will become vested)". Do you agree that the "earliest date" is the date on which a participant becomes partial vested? That is, on a 2/20 vesting schedule, does a participant "become vested" when they become 20% vested or when they become 100% vested? Thanks

Thanks

On what line of Form 5500, Schedule H would you report the value of a private hedge fund? Investors are not partners, the fund is not a registered investment, it is not a trust. Would you report it as a joint venture? Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experience.