Non-ERISA Plan Restated as ERISA Plan

[Christine Roberts]

A 501©(3) org. has maintained a non-ERISA 403(b) arrangement since 1990.

In 2002 the plan is "restated" as an ERISA 403(b) plan with employer matching contributions.

Is this in fact a restatement, or is it a creation of an entirely new plan?

More specifically, should the plan document/Form 5500 identify the initial effective date as being in 2002 or 1990?

I am thinking the former, but cannot recall any statute, regulation or guidance that is directly on point as to the correct answer.

[Guest richardl]

I believe the 2002 date is correct and it is a new plan. Unable to provide the source. If I am wrong, please post.

Rich

[Guest jashendo]

Christine --

Unless the organization actually took action to terminate the plan and establish a new one (or if they did something like establish a second separate plan), the technically correct answer is that it is the same plan. As it happens, a 2002 amendment has had the effect of rendering the plan subject to ERISA and requiring 5500 filing, etc.

If filing a return with the "initial return" box checked and an effective date of 1990 causes the DOL's computer to spit out a letter asking where prior years' returns are, you have a good explanation (i.e., plan has not been required to file for earlier years.)

[mbozek]

why not treat this as (a) terminaton of non erisa Plan and replacement with ERISA Plan 001 since there are no formal procedures for terminating a 403(b) plan or (b) adoption of ERISA Plan 001 in 2002 which replaces the non ERISA plan.