Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

We have a few calendar-year DC plans that terminated in mid-2009 whose trustees didn't pay out all of the benefits by 12/31/09. Since 1/1/10 is a plan entry date, do employees who meet the eligiblity requirements become participants or can there never be new participants entering a plan after its termination date?

Also, I can envision a couple of the trustees dragging their feet on the payouts to where a full year could elapse from their plan's date of termination. I remember some time ago hearing that a termination goes away after a year if the assets have not been distributed, making the plan an active plan again - is this accurate? BTW, the plan terminations were done via board resolution, so waiting for IRS approval of the terminations is not the reason for the delay.

Posted
BTW, the plan terminations were done via board resolution, so waiting for IRS approval of the terminations is not the reason for the delay.

How about a plan amendment? Assuming there is an amendment, it should state "... no new participants after xx/xx/xx..."

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.

Posted

Perhaps this language should be included in termination amendments going forward. However, in this case there was no such amendment prior to the 1/1/10 plan entry date - does this mean the plan will have new participants to be included in the participant count on the 5500? How have you handled plan terminations a year after their effective date? All help is greatly appreciated.

Posted

Please explain how the plans were "terminated"" and yet there is the possibility of new participants. What does "terminated" mean? Unfortunately, there are at least two meanings to "termination" becuse of the IRS position that a plan is not "terminated" until all the assets are disbursed. The colloquial definition implies no new participants and should be effective for cutting off participation unless there is something strange about the resolutions. A termination has to lead a double life becuase it is almost impossible to have both definitions effective at the same time.

  • 3 months later...
Guest Dressageho
Posted

Do the DC Plans require a contribution, or is it discretionary? What's your real concern? Allocation of forfeitures (assuming they weren't allocated, effective as of the termination date)? Does it matter if people become eligible if no future contributions are made? What's holding up the pay out?

Posted

Doesn't the resolution to terminate the plan say all contributions to the plan will cease as of x/y/zz?

QKA, QPA, CPC, ERPA

Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use