Jump to content

Bri

Senior Contributor
  • Posts

    1,091
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    59

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Bri reacted to QDROphile in QDRO questions going through divorce Fidelity Pension   
    Essentially, I agree with, “Get a different lawyer.” Maybe it does not have to be so dramatic. In the retirement professionals community, both lawyers and non-lawyers have a general expectation that most domestic relations lawyers do not understand retirement plans, and pension plans in particular (because they also include actuarial principles). Most domestic relations lawyers also know that they do not understand retirement plan law. Consequently, domestic relations lawyers will have a relationship with one or more lawyers who understand retirement plans and QDRO law. Before even contemplating a QDRO one must consider the design and provisions of the retirement plans to be divided in the divorce and how to measure and describe the interest that each party in the divorce will have in the plan or plans. The primary divorce lawyer can associate with, or be advised by, a lawyer who is competent to work with retirement plans, ultimately including drafting a QDRO. If your lawyer seems lacking in understanding or answers that can be conveyed to you so that you understand, then your lawyer needs to connect with another lawyer for help with the retirement plans. Or you get another lawyer.
  2. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Luke Bailey in Rollover before Required Beginning Date   
    And of course, I overlooked that it's still the 2024 minimum being paid based off 2023, so I do think they're going to have to recoup some of that IRA rollover to satisfy the RMD.  (And adjust the amount coming out of the IRA for earnings since it was an ineligible rollover contribution.  Hmmm, thinking out loud has me presuming only the "principal" amount coming from the IRA satisfies the RMD for the plan, like you couldn't count some of the earnings towards the RMD.)
  3. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Luke Bailey in Rollover before Required Beginning Date   
    If the termination is 12/15/24, isn't the RBD 4/1/2025 so that the 2023 balance is out of the equation?
  4. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Luke Bailey in 0% prior yr NHCE ADP   
    Or, if it's not too late, allocate a QNEC to last year's NHCEs?
  5. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Luke Bailey in Compensation Issue   
    I would at least double-check to see if the BPD says anything about how deferral elections may or may not apply to "imputed income" rather than a straight wage payment to the employee.
     
  6. Like
    Bri got a reaction from CuseFan in Vesting At Retirement Age   
    Well heck, if we're getting semantic/pedantic, let's go further and say it's the 5th anniversary of the first day of the plan year in which participation commenced. 
  7. Like
    Bri reacted to David Schultz in Safe Harbor Match by Payroll - failing compensation ratio test   
    A plan does not lose safe harbor status.  It has a failure that needs to be corrected.  Follow the terms of the plan document. 
    Assuming you have a pre-approved plan document, and this plan was designed to be an ADP/ACP safe harbor, the document certainly says that the plan will satisfy ADP/ACP testing by satisfying the safe harbor requirements.  It must still do that - in a nondiscriminatory way. 
    I bet somewhere in the plan document (buried in the BPD section on safe harbor contributions) it also says that the SH contribution must be based on a nondiscriminatory (not just reasonable) definition of comp. If the plan didn't do so, it has an operational failure that needs to be corrected by doing what it is supposed to do (no -11(g) amendment as this isn't a nondiscrimination or coverage failure, it was an operational failure). 
    The plan should recalculate the match based on a nondiscriminatory definition of comp. (and I would do an annual/true-up allocation since the correct periodic match wasn't deposited by the end of the following quarter). That'll be in the BPD as well.
  8. Like
    Bri got a reaction from acm_acm in Safe Harbor Match by Payroll - failing compensation ratio test   
    I like Lou's idea.  but wonder......
    Is there any thought that because the payroll-period SH match on the commissions would not have been deposited quarterly as is typically required, that somehow the adjustment now also has to include earnings from what would have been those "end of following quarter" deadlines?
  9. Like
    Bri reacted to Paul I in Transfer employment within controlled group - a termination?   
    In a controlled group, moving from one employer to another within the group is not a distributable event from either employer's plan. 
    Transferring an account from one plan to another will require each plan to have provisions to allow the transfer out and to accept the transfer in as a trust-to-trust transfer.  This may not be a great idea if there are differences between the protected benefits in the two plans
  10. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Gilmore in Rollover before Required Beginning Date   
    And of course, I overlooked that it's still the 2024 minimum being paid based off 2023, so I do think they're going to have to recoup some of that IRA rollover to satisfy the RMD.  (And adjust the amount coming out of the IRA for earnings since it was an ineligible rollover contribution.  Hmmm, thinking out loud has me presuming only the "principal" amount coming from the IRA satisfies the RMD for the plan, like you couldn't count some of the earnings towards the RMD.)
  11. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Luke Bailey in Safe Harbor Match by Payroll - failing compensation ratio test   
    I like Lou's idea.  but wonder......
    Is there any thought that because the payroll-period SH match on the commissions would not have been deposited quarterly as is typically required, that somehow the adjustment now also has to include earnings from what would have been those "end of following quarter" deadlines?
  12. Like
    Bri reacted to Lou S. in Safe Harbor Match by Payroll - failing compensation ratio test   
    Corrective -11(g) amendment to include commissions for NHCEs with a true up match calculation? That seems to be one way to handle it, there are probably others.
  13. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Luke Bailey in Does the 10% Penalty Apply   
    Not the ones who roll over their balances.
    But the exception is for termination of employment, not termination of the plan.
     
    72(t)(2)(A):
    (v) made to an employee after separation from service after attainment of age 55,
  14. Like
    Bri reacted to Bill Presson in Can forfeitures be used to pay for earnings on an EPCRS SCP QNEC?   
    Can’t use plan assets to pay employer penalties. 
  15. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Lou S. in Does this cross-tested plan pass??   
    I can't *imagine* your plan document requires it to be tested for nondiscrimination solely on a benefits basis. 
    Do your rate groups on an allocations basis, and all the rate groups will pass > 70%.  And then (except for the random possible exceptions which we as a pension community will remind you of in subsequent comments) you should be good.
     
  16. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Bill Presson in Does the 10% Penalty Apply   
    Not the ones who roll over their balances.
    But the exception is for termination of employment, not termination of the plan.
     
    72(t)(2)(A):
    (v) made to an employee after separation from service after attainment of age 55,
  17. Like
    Bri reacted to Bill Presson in EZ Filer.... Changing sponsor from "XYZ CPA" to "Bob & Sue CPAs LLC"   
    Correct. Updated info goes in 1 & 2 and old info in 4a and b.
  18. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Luke Bailey in Does this cross-tested plan pass??   
    I can't *imagine* your plan document requires it to be tested for nondiscrimination solely on a benefits basis. 
    Do your rate groups on an allocations basis, and all the rate groups will pass > 70%.  And then (except for the random possible exceptions which we as a pension community will remind you of in subsequent comments) you should be good.
     
  19. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Luke Bailey in Excluding service prior to adoption of the plan for vetsing   
    It includes plans terminated in the last five years, not currently active ones.
  20. Like
    Bri reacted to Lou S. in overfunded match contributions   
    If they were all NHCEs you can probably self correct by retroactive amendment to conform the document to the actual match contributed for the Plan year if they all got more than the match formula even if it's not uniform since with will clearly be non discriminatory if the extra natch only when to NHCEs.
  21. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Lou S. in gateway test when def/SH & PS have diff elig requirements   
    (and hopefully the plan's document "guarantees gateway" as needed for those with only the SH allocation prescribed)
  22. Like
    Bri reacted to Belgarath in QACA 2-6 year graded vesting   
    The QACA safe harbor contributions themselves cannot use 6-year graded vesting. But, there could be other employer contributions such as profit sharing that could use that vesting schedule.
  23. Like
    Bri reacted to C. B. Zeller in Employee w/ loan becomes Union EE--default the loan?   
    Is there anything in this particular plan document that says a loan becomes payable in full immediately upon the employee becoming a union member (or more generally, transferring to an excluded class of employees)? Usually I would only see that kind of provision apply upon termination of employment, but I suppose it could happen.
    Absent that, I don't think so. The employee continues to repay it through payroll deduction (assuming that's what the loan policy says). Transferring to an excluded class means you are not entitled to future contributions. Loan repayments are not contributions.
  24. Like
    Bri got a reaction from acm_acm in gateway test when def/SH & PS have diff elig requirements   
    (and hopefully the plan's document "guarantees gateway" as needed for those with only the SH allocation prescribed)
  25. Like
    Bri got a reaction from Luke Bailey in gateway test when def/SH & PS have diff elig requirements   
    (and hopefully the plan's document "guarantees gateway" as needed for those with only the SH allocation prescribed)
×
×
  • Create New...