Lois Baker

Lockton: https://benefitslink.com/cgi-bin/pr/index.cgi?rm=press_release&id=53530 Northshire Consulting (Chamber of Commerce plans): https://benefitslink.com/cgi-bin/pr/index.cgi?rm=press_release&id=53505 Platinum 401k: https://benefitslink.com/cgi-bin/pr/index.cgi?rm=press_release&id=53488

So the deduction probably would be available to the employer; question then is whether the fees are taxable income for the employees. IRS Pub. 525 distinguishes between "qualified retirement planning services" and "financial counseling fees": Financial counseling fees paid for you by your employer are included in your income and must be reported as part of wages. Fees for tax or investment counseling are miscellaneous itemized deductions and are no longer deductible..... If your employer has a qualified retirement plan, qualified retirement planning services provided to you (and your spouse) by your employer aren't included in your income. Qualified services include retirement planning advice, information about your employer's retirement plan, and information about how the plan may fit into your overall individual retirement income plan. You can't exclude the value of any tax preparation, accounting, legal, or brokerage services provided by your employer. Also, see Financial Counseling Fees, earlier. Another approach might be to terminate the plan, roll to individual IRAs, pay the fees directly from the IRAs, and have the owner-employees make individual deductible contributions that (at least in this case) could cover the total aggregate investment fees. The employer could increase W-2 salaries to cover those amounts, but that triggers FICA/FUTA costs. Since it's an S-corp, the owner-employees could instead pay the fees from an S-corp distribution (or make the contributions from other assets). Depending on the amounts involved, the 199A deduction could in fact make the S-corp distribution approach significantly less costly than W-2/FICA.

Some browsers have trouble displaying fillable PDF forms -- if you save the file to your hard drive, you might have better luck. A copy downloaded from the IRS website is attached to this message; try saving it to your hard drive (or you can download it directly from the IRS website -- right-click on this link and select "save as": https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8955ssa.pdf) f8955ssa.pdf

There is a whole host of "Compliance Calendars" in the BenefitsLink news archive -- maybe a quick run through one or more of those would help? Here are a few (and for differing types of plans): https://benefitslink.com/news/index.cgi/view/20200127-155620 https://benefitslink.com/news/index.cgi/view/20200127-155621 https://benefitslink.com/news/index.cgi/view/20200226-156243 (There are more, and by different authors ... the search engine should find a few.)

IRS Q&A #11 may be relevant: https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/coronavirus-related-relief-for-retirement-plans-and-iras-questions-and-answers

Also DOL Fact Sheet

Maybe this? IRS Notice 2020-23: "For an Affected Taxpayer with respect to Specified Filing and Payment Obligations, the due date for filing Specified Forms and making Specified Payments is automatically postponed to July 15, 2020.... This relief is automatic ... The Secretary of the Treasury has also determined that any person performing a time-sensitive action listed in ... Revenue Procedure 2018-58 ... which is due to be performed on or after April 1, 2020, and before July 15, 2020 (Specified Time-Sensitive Action), is an Affected Taxpayer." Rev. Proc. 2018-58 -- See page 45

Maybe this? IRS Notice 2020-23: "For an Affected Taxpayer with respect to Specified Filing and Payment Obligations, the due date for filing Specified Forms and making Specified Payments is automatically postponed to July 15, 2020.... This relief is automatic ... The Secretary of the Treasury has also determined that any person performing a time-sensitive action listed in ... Revenue Procedure 2018-58 ... which is due to be performed on or after April 1, 2020, and before July 15, 2020 (Specified Time-Sensitive Action), is an Affected Taxpayer." Rev. Proc. 2018-58 -- See page 48

IRS Notice 2020-23: "For an Affected Taxpayer with respect to Specified Filing and Payment Obligations, the due date for filing Specified Forms and making Specified Payments is automatically postponed to July 15, 2020.... This relief is automatic ... The Secretary of the Treasury has also determined that any person performing a time-sensitive action listed in ... Revenue Procedure 2018-58 ... which is due to be performed on or after April 1, 2020, and before July 15, 2020 (Specified Time-Sensitive Action), is an Affected Taxpayer." Rev. Proc. 2018-58 -- See page 57

Here's the ARA letter to EBSA: https://www.asppa.org/sites/asppa.org/files/PDFs/GAC/Comment Letter/20.03.30_ARA_DOL_COVID_ N%26D_relief.pdf

Possibly helpful article here: https://www.wagnerlawgroup.com/resources/investment/pandemic-and-broker-dealer/recordkeepers-and-advisors-chances-are-your-business-continuity-plan-did-not-fully-address-this

What I've seen (so far) is state regulation of the insurers -- which was the original question above (i.e., whether the terms of the insurance policy would permit an employer to continue coverage). Haven't seen anything specific as to employer requirements (yet), but as more states/localities enact "quarantine leave" rules, it's possible employer mandates will be included. Looks like the exact answer will depend a whole lot on where the employer is located.

Some states are requiring insurers to be lenient in this regard; you might check with the state insurance commissioner. We're posting them as we find them, but we certainly don't have all of them. I know I've seen Ohio and Washington State; this article lists others but it's from 3/18: https://www.mercer.com/content/dam/mercer/attachments/global/law-and-policy/gl-2020-covid-19-spurs-irs-relief-for-hdhps-state-insurance-guidance.pdf Also, some insurers are acting voluntarily: https://www.ahip.org/health-insurance-providers-respond-to-coronavirus-covid-19/

Here's the most recent word from IRS: https://benefitslink.com/newsletters/2020/2020_03_27_retirement_bulletin_2.html

This seems to be the bill as passed by the Senate: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6819239/FINAL-FINAL-CARES-ACT.pdf#page=157 Of course, the House still needs to act, which is scheduled for Friday. The official full text will appear here (hopefully later today): https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/748

See Q&A 20 here: https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/filing-and-payment-deadlines-questions-and-answers

From Thursday's BenefitsLink H&W Plans newsletter: https://benefitslink.com/news/index.cgi/view/20200319-156762

Several retirement plan provisions, including easing withdrawal penalties and repayments, as well as loan relief, were included in the CARES bill ... which was scuttled last night. Who knows what happens next ...

This article may be helpful (will be in today's BenefitsLink newsletter): https://www.blankrome.com/publications/401k-plans-during-covid-19-pandemic

If you're still keeping track of these, this article published today might be helpful: https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2020/03/the-latest-decisions-in-actuarial-equivalent-lawsuits

Here's a summary of 9 cases filed as of last August; maybe the authors would be willing to provide an update? https://www.truckerhuss.com/2019/08/defined-benefit-plan-actuarial-equivalence-litigation-a-formidable-threat-or-an-unfounded-theory/

Any "predecessor employer" language anywhere in the document?

SEC. 114. INCREASE IN AGE FOR REQUIRED BEGINNING DATE FOR MANDATORY DISTRIBUTIONS. (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 401(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘age 70-1/2’ and inserting ‘‘age 72’’. (b) SPOUSE BENEFICIARIES; SPECIAL RULE FOR OWNERS.—Subparagraphs (B)(iv)(I) and (C)(ii)(I) of section 401(a)(9) of such Code are each amended by striking ‘‘age 70-1/2’’ and inserting ‘‘age 72’’. (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—The last sentence of section 408(b) of such Code is amended by striking ‘‘age 70-1/2" and inserting ‘‘age 72’’. (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall apply to distributions required to be made after December 31, 2019, with respect to individuals who attain age 70-1/2 after such date. https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr1865/BILLS-116hr1865enr.pdf Page 623

Re the RMD beginning date, this article (which will be included in today's BenefitsLink newsletter) might be of interest: https://www.beneficiallyyours.com/2019/12/30/the-required-minimum-distribution-date-for-retirement-benefits-the-cuban-missile-crisis/

Thanks so much, Larry -- we aim to please!