Erik Read

To further the conversation and concept - which of these can be provided electronically, versus which are required distribution via mail? Oh - and let's add the ERISA Desk log to confirm individuals included in the correspondence in the event of a DOL audit.

I would only be concerned if the Trust's Payroll (AUP) auditor is also the Unions CPA and preparing the payroll - then they are auditing their own work.

Which industry are they participating in? There are some exceptions and some additional issues based on the industry.

Please review topic under the 401(k) board and respond - I'm trying to build a provider list. Thanks. 401(k) Board Topic Link

Nothing - boy - I figured this would start some type of discussion. I'll post a link under the General and Investment boards as well. Perhaps, like me, everyone is just scrambling to find out if they're covered or not.

So far, we've learned that Charles Schwab includes the 401(k) or employer sponsored retirement plan investments against unauthorized transactions with limitations and conditions (of course) for protection of login ID and PIN# security by the participant/investor. Wells Fargo does not cover brokerage and investment accounts in their "Online Security Policy." We're asking Fidelity, and several others, but I thought this would be a timely and appropriate topic for discussion. Have any of your clients asked for a guarantee against un-authroized transactions and distributions? Thanks.

We have a max accrural on vacation time, and someone has recently suggested that we can allow the employees who are about to lose hours of vacation time, to contribute that to the 401(k) Plan instead. Fact about the plan I think you should know- 401(k) Plan is management only, all others are subject to CBA. I know under a cafeteria plan you can buy and sell vacation time, however, you if you are going to allow employees to transfer unused $$'s to the 401(k) you have to also offer a cash out. If we offer the option to transfer at risk vacation hours to the 401(k) would we have to offer that as a cash-out as well? Thanks for any advice and or guidance links.

Depends really on how many notices your talking about. One trust that I work on has over 40,000 members that need the notice, so a mailing is fairly expensive. We're adding language to the SAR that informs them of their right to the information and how to get it.

Facts: large TH self-funded H&W arangement with over 200 participating employers an employer with more than a POP 125 plan - full FSA COBRA elections and notices? Okay - obviously the H&W and FSA are seperate trusts, would the FSA be required to offer COBRA or more specifically where can I find the regs on how to qualify for the HIPAA exemption. I'm new to H&W and FSA's - so by default also COBRA - any good links to reference sites for research would be much appreciated (not saying that BenefitsLink is not a good source). Thanks.

I'm merely saying that the TPA is not required to keep/maintain/update/draft/amend the plan document. I'm sure that a "summary" or an SPD could be used by the TPA for them to code systems and administer the plan without a document - wake up... huh - oh yeah.... right... although, I'd be very leary of that TPA were I a Plan Sponsor.

I think the question is also the fact that the reimburesment request is for the whole amount of the GC, and they are asking if the OTC med was less than the total and the member recieved cash back from the GC, then they would be reimbursed for more than their out-of-pocket actual cost for the OTC med.... right? I say you need more documentation before paying to be sure the cost of the item +tax if applicable is covered, but nothing more from the FSA. That would be like me taking a $20 MO in to pay for a $4 bottle of asprin, then requesting reimbursement for the entire MO.

Do the terms of the CBA specify the amount contributed, or do they simply state that the parties agree to be bound by the terms of the trust and make contributions as determined by said trust? If so, then your okay with a supplemental contribution or increasing the rate, if not, then you would have to look to the specifics of each CBA, and have the trust provide a period for the supplemental if neccessary, so each CBA would be subject to the new contribution at ratification for x period regardless of when the funding begins - accounting/actuary nightmare - sure, but you've gotta do what ya gotta do.

Thanks - I had not heard about the Teamsters approval. I knew they were sitting on several, just wanted to see if there had been any accepted - now it looks like there has been "one".... so might give us some hope.

Keeping in mind comments so far - I agree it's not the TPA's responsability to keep the document, however, they should have a copy at the very least. Things to consider - type of document - it very well could have been drafted by someone other than the TPA, especially if it's not a volume sub doc. I like the very last suggestion - have the client retain counsel - sounds like they're going to need it, if not just to get a document in place.

That address's one point of the many involved with 404(c ) compliance - the notices. There are SIGNIFICANT issues (in my opinion, and after hearing Fred's discussions on the topic a few times now) with an individual brokerage account, and the level of education that must be provided. I stand by the belief that if the DOL want's to make you a Fiduciary for some reason - they will, regardless of how many hoops, and how big the hoops are that you've jumped through, that said, you really have to weigh if STATEING that the plan is 404(c ) compliant is what you want to do - and subject the policies to that level of scrutiny - I'm feeling a catch22 come on.... PS - when using the (c ) be sure to space it until the fix is done otherwise you get ©

Has anyone had an application accepted? I've heard lots of rumors about how hard is was/is to get them approved. Just curious.

Sounds like several of us "ole-timers" are having issues getting logged back in. I've sent Dave several messages, and he must be swamped - no reply - either that - or they aren't getting through. I had to change my login - and he'll need to re-assign moderator status' or figure out the issue with the password resets. I know he's working hard on things, and at this point, I think our login ability is low man on the pole - although I do miss the "status" and "ego trips" from the original subscriber dates and number of posts - sniff.

Okay - I can strech 411d6 - but is that not more specific to amendments, I'm not reducing a benefit nor an accrural, just adding to the number of hours that count...(open can of worms here). Let's suppose then - one specific example, not a hypothetical - Retirement Effective Date 03/01/00, DOD 01/08/02 - SLA benefit - Balance of the 60 months were not paid as there was no surviving beneificary. Audited delinquent hours reported in the 1992/93, 1993/94, 1994/95 & 1995/96 Plan Years. Estimate that $43.35 is owed to the Estate. My opinion we have no ERISA obligation to provide this.

Okay - so it's Friday afternoon, and I'm ready to stump or try for the weekend. I'm looking forward to the replies on Monday. We have a situation in a DB Plan, where the member/participant has deceased, and now, after auditing the employer's hour reporting, we discovered a discrepancy that is more than 2 years old (hypothetically, let's say the participants DOD was 11/1/04 and the amended hours reported due to the audit were for the 2001/2002 plan year). While we have the ability to recalculate the pension amounts, is there a compelling argument or ERISA regulation (cite please) that states we MUST recalculate their benefits and pay there estate or, in the event we still have the spouse in pay status to increase that benefit? Our preliminary review shows that perhaps on the high end we owe the estates between $20 and $100 total. Thanks for the 2 cents and IMHO

Have them negotiate the repayment with the providers. In many cases, they'd rather settle for pennies on the dollar than lose everything, and have to pay legal fees as well. Some are know to write significant amounts down or even off all together if they know your situation. As for why the government would take the house to repay the medical bills is a mystery. When I first read your post, I assumed you were stating that he had no will, and that Idaho would be similar to some other states where an unclaimed estate becomes the property of the state. Have him leave it to his Mrs. - or better yet, sell it now, and move to an appartment or somewhere else so they don't have that tangible asset. I also believe the laws allow for a primary residence - I don't think they'd really kick her to the street. But - I'm young, and may be naive

Your "government" word is giving me grief, but my understanding is, once the benefit is accrued it cannot be reduced - i.e. if you have anything other than a last-day provision in the plan the participants will accrue it during the course of the year, perhaps after 1000 hours, perhaps at some other interval. You can amend it for the next benefit year for sure, you may just have some issues with this year.

What does the document say? If it is silent, have you used a forfeiture/suspense account in the plan before? Can you spend them on fees rather than allocate or suspend?

DOH - shows you how long it's been since I've actually done the 5500 myself - huh... yikes. Guess I'll just fade away now.

Search for comments from Fred Reish on this topic - or visit his site - he's spent a lot of time lately on the topic. Short answer is that even with perceved 404© protection - you probably don't have it - so your on the hook. If your going to offer the brokerage account option to allow for all sorts of investments, you'll probably need to provide more investment advice than you want to..... Read Fred's materials, then see what you think.

I agree - you need to go after the $2k from the participant, and then he needs to claim the $400 as taxes paid in error or ???? on his annual filing. You paid them on his behalf - so even if you tried to get the $400 back, unless it comes from him, he'd probably still report it as a tax withheld on his filing .... Sounds like fun.