404(a)(5) Notices

[52626]

Need some help with timing of notices.

We want to send "one" set of notices to the participants. QDIA, Auto Enrollment and 404(a)(5).

The QDIA and Auto Enrollment Notice would be sent out November 1 to all participants. The 404(a)(5) notice currently produced by the platform shows returns as of 2/2013. I thought I could include this as the annual notice for 2014 along with the QDIA and Auto Enrollment Forms.

the platform tells me that they will post a new 404a5 notice in 2014 and that is the annual notice I must provide to the participants for 2014.

so confused need so thoughts

[Guest A_Dude]

I don't think that was the intention for the 404(a)5 notice to be sent in 2013 that covers 2014. Why don't you just mail it with the 1st Qtr statements for 2014, or 2013 4th Qtr statements? I can see your logic with sending it earlier, but I would at least use 9-30 investment returns then.

[52626]

Under the key considerations of FAB 2013-02 it stated, the flexibility ( referring to the transitonal period for the second annual notice), allows you to align the secound round of 404(a)(5) disclosures with other plan disclosure and notices deadlines, creating a cost efficent solution for mailings. It also allows participants to receive the information in conjuction with other plan materials, notices or dislcosures.

The QDIA and Auto Enrollment notice must be distributed by December 1 ( 30 days before the beginning of the next plan year). If the purpose was to co ordiante notices, can't I include the 2013 404(a)(5) notice with these notices?

[cpc0506]

You are right in your interpretation of the FAB. FYI, if you already gave the 2013 notice (tying it to last year's notice date), the FAB goes on to say that you can use the transitional period for 2014.

[Guest A_Dude]

So your going to just give the 2013 notice twice? Have you given the notice for 2013 yet? If trying to pull double duty for one year I would be concerned, especially with usuing outdated investment return data and giving it to participant late in the year for 2013. Using 9/30 numbers and issuing them before the plan year begins I think is fine, but using older investment return data than 9/30 would give me DOL audit concern. Yes, it may meet the regulation technically, but does it actually satisfy the regulations intended objectives?

P.S. We just had the FDIC doing their regular auditing, and they went through every detail in our Fee Disclosures for plans. They litteraly questioned and double checked everything, right down to the words used. They didn't find anything wrong , but they annoyed me very much!