austin3515 Posted January 15, 2013 Posted January 15, 2013 Can I merge these two plans together? Any chance? Perhaps a non-elective transfer? Let me know. Austin Powers, CPA, QPA, ERPA
austin3515 Posted January 15, 2013 Author Posted January 15, 2013 FYI, the goal is not to 100% vest the employer money. i.e., that is why we don't want to terminate. Austin Powers, CPA, QPA, ERPA
rcline46 Posted January 15, 2013 Posted January 15, 2013 You cannot merge or do a trustee to trustee transfer from a 401(a) plan to a 403(b) plan (or vice versa). Best to 'freeze' the 401(a) plan and start the matching contributions in the 403(b) plan, and wait until all are naturally terminated or become 100% vested and then terminate the 401(a) plan.
jpod Posted January 15, 2013 Posted January 15, 2013 What is the investment platform/cost structure for the 401(a) match plan? How about just converting it to a 401k and terminating/stopping the 403(b)?
rcline46 Posted January 15, 2013 Posted January 15, 2013 jpod, no ADP testing on the 403(b) is a very good thing. Other minor advantages to a 403(b) usually argue to keeping it alive rather than a 401(k).
austin3515 Posted January 15, 2013 Author Posted January 15, 2013 The idea of having my client deposit match to two different plans sounds 3 times more complicated than what they have already; I'm trying to make things simpler Austin Powers, CPA, QPA, ERPA
jpod Posted January 15, 2013 Posted January 15, 2013 rcline46: I defer to people in the recordkeeping/TPA business, but is no ADP testing really that big a deal when you already must do ACP testing for the 401(a) match plan?
rcline46 Posted January 15, 2013 Posted January 15, 2013 Austin - only put the match into the 403(b), and freeze the 401(a), so only 1 plan. 401(a) even with 6 year vesting would only last a maximum of 5 more years, maybe less when number of people needing 100% vesting is small. jpod, yes, no ADP test really a big deal, especially when match is capped.
austin3515 Posted January 15, 2013 Author Posted January 15, 2013 But there would be a partial plan termination because no further contributions would be deposited. Austin Powers, CPA, QPA, ERPA
rcline46 Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 Ahhh, ye olde 'substantial and recurring' rule. Convert the plan to a frozen MPPP, gets rid of the rule.
mbozek Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 Ahhh, ye olde 'substantial and recurring' rule. Convert the plan to a frozen MPPP, gets rid of the rule. wouldnt converting to MPPP require that plan provide annuity benefit as normal distribution and spousal consent to take lump sum? continuue 401k for employee elective contribution only by non HCE and use 403b for employer contributions and elective contributions by HCE. Partial termination problem goes away. 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