k man

do you think the prospectus must be in the form of a .pdf or can it be a link?

ok. i agree. now lets talk about furnish and what that means. can furnish be via electronic means. it would seem difficult to satisfy electonically across the board but if you could at least for those that consent to receive things electronically.

if participant goes into a QDIA i would assume it is necessary to provide a prospectus at or near the time the investment is made. for example a prospectus could be mailed to the participant after the cash is invested. the regs dont mention prospectuses at all but 404© requires a prospectus be made available to the participant after the investment is made.

our client has both plans though they are not linked or set up as a wrap-around arrangement. basically the administrator gives them an estimate as to how much their HCE's can put into the qualified plan each year and whatever else they want to save they must make an election in their NQDC plan. this year they have ADP refunds and they want to put the refunds into the NQDC plan. i feel that this would easily violate 409A but i am curious if others agree.

does 408(d)(5)(B) allow the taxpayer to avoid the excise tax on excess IRA contributions due to an error by a financial institution or just the tax due?

i represent a plan sponsor that would like to purchase property from the plan at FMV. My research tells me that he can do this by filing for a class exemption and waiver of the excise tax under the VFC program. can anyone confirm this is a correct interpretation?

My view is that a one person (owner of company) plan is not subject to Title I and therefore would not have to purchase a bond in order to avoid a CPA audit if it has non qualifying plan assets in excess of the limit. can anyone confirm this is correct?

there are NHCEs in the plan of course. just none they are bringing in due to the service credit. we dont want to amend the plan's eligibility. that would allow all new employees into the plan in the future. that is not what they want.

i have an employer (a law firm) that is adding a new partner. they want to credit this employees past service with another employer. they have never done this before. is this discriminatory per se or can a case be made since there are no other NHCEs and there is a valid business purpose it would be ok.

it confirms my view... i did see 2005-66 but thought it applied only to amendments made within the remedial amendment period.

Seems like a fairly easy question but i cant find the answer...what is the deadline for discretionary plan amendments? is it the last day of the plan year or is it the deadline for filing tax returns?

per the plan document severance after separation from service is not compensation under the plan. however, what if as part of the severance agreement the employer is still paying the ee's health insurance. does that change anything? the termination date might be different.

the employer notified employees that the plan was a safe harbor matching formula. later in the year the employer implemented a plan design that requires a safe harbor nonelective in connection with another plan. they basically make a mistake in thinking they had a safe harbor nonelective. would they be able to just make the safe harbor nonelective essentially changing the formula they have in their plan? no ee would receive any less.

I have a client that purchased a limited partnership investment in his IRA. the K1 from the LP shows UBTI. how does the client or IRA deal with this tax? my understanding is the IRA must pay the tax and it is at trust tax rates.

so the final regs are out and i have a practical application question. a participant is about to receive a contribution but has no investment elections on file. under the final regs, the PA is expected to give notice 30 days in advance of the first investment. in the meantime (the time between when contributions are received and the 30 days passes) what does the PA do with the money?

is the approval or denial of loans by a tpa in accordance with loan program created by the plan sponsor a ministerial or fiduciary function?

can anyone clarify what type of plan they are referring to here in the regs. A pension benefit plan the benefits of which are provided exclusively through allocated insurance contracts or policies which are issued by, and pursuant to the specific terms of such contracts or policies benefit payments are fully guaranteed by an insurance company or similar organization which is qualified to do business in any State, and the premiums for which are paid directly by the employer or employee organization from its general assets or partly from its general assets and partly from contributions by its employees or members: Provided, That contributions by participants are forwarded by the employer or employee organization to the insurance company or organization within three months of receipt and, in the case of a plan that provides for the return of refunds to contributing participants, such refunds are returned to them within three months of receipt by the employer or employee organization; and [Amended April 19, 2000 by 65 FR 21805.]

I have a tax exempt that wants a 457(f) NQ plan. They will contribute employer money only. if anyone can give me some key bullet points of the issues i need to focus on so i can be sure i have not missed anything. I have done some research and while I know 409A can be complex i believe if the plan is relatively simple it can be done fairly easily. Regarding the short term deferral exception, does the rule say that if participants take a distribution of the money within 2 1/2 after the lapse of the risk of forfeiture the plan avoids 409A?

can you allow full control over the investments in a 457(f) ineligible plan or will this violate the funding rules?

assuming a TPA is not a fiduciary what course of action in addition to sending letters should be taken to protect the plan and avoid liability for the TPA? case law seems to state that steps should be taken to protect the plan but it is not necessary to inform the DOL or the participants.

so what is the key criteria that makes a plan eligible (457(b)) vs. ineligible 457(f)? is it the deferral limit. in this plan there wont be employee money but it might exceed the limit (though i doubt it).

there will be no deferrals (employee contributions).

org wants to have a plan with nonelective employer contributions. would this plan be subject to 457(f) as well as 409A?

it dawned me that i might have put this thread in the wrong sub category. if the plan will not include any employee deferrals would it still be subject to 457(f) or would it just be subject to 409A.

the client has a 401(k). took investment elections from the plan participants but never implemented them. the money was invested in money market and has remained there since. i would imagine that they would be required to give the participants lost earnings. do you use the dol fiduciary correction program for this?