Guest bbaudo Posted November 11, 2002 Posted November 11, 2002 We are consulting on a plan that: 1. Matches only if participants are deferring to company stock 2. The match is made only in company stock 3. The company discontinues match if participant stops deferring to company stock We have only seen this type of match once before, and are looking for any research or statistics that would back up our recommending a change in their matching practice. Has anyone seen this type of match, does it work effectively, and/or can you provide some guidance? bbaudo
QDROphile Posted November 11, 2002 Posted November 11, 2002 Really bad idea. Distance yourself from it to the extent possible. To the extent it has any thinking behind it, the thinking is twisted.
david rigby Posted November 11, 2002 Posted November 11, 2002 ...and probably increases the likelihood of not passing the ADP test. I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.
Brian Gallagher Posted November 12, 2002 Posted November 12, 2002 ...and don't forget coverage testing. did this plan get a determination letter with that match? wacky, wacky wacky! Remember: two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.
E as in ERISA Posted November 12, 2002 Posted November 12, 2002 Look at Regulations Section 1.401(a)(4)-4 re benefits, rights and features. In particular look at Regs Sec. 1.401(a)(4)-4(e)(3)(iii)(G) that indicates that each rate of match is a right or feature (and therefore has to be made available on a nondiscriminatory basis).
2muchstress Posted November 12, 2002 Posted November 12, 2002 How is the document written? I would imagine that the document provides for a discretionary match, and the employer is trying to use his own definition of discretionary. I have had several employers misinterpret the word discretionary and it is almost humorous to see what they can come up with.
mbozek Posted November 13, 2002 Posted November 13, 2002 There is also an issue of whether the investment in co stock may be limited to 10% of the plan assets under ERISA 407(B)(2) if the plan requires that the ee contributions must be invested in er stock. I have reviewed 401(k) plans which provide for higher matching contribution percentages when ees invest in er securities, e.g., a 50% match instead of 25% match or permit the purchase of stock at a discount which have been approved by the IRS. Many of the S & P 500 companies(P & G, Coke, Phillip Morris) maintain 401(k) plans where more than 90% of plan assets are invested in co stock which is frequently available with a greater % or at a discount. mjb
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now