BenefitsLink.com logo   

BenefitsLink
Message Boards Digest

January 25, 2018

Here are the most recently added topics on the BenefitsLink Message Boards:

Author's photo

jeanh created a topic in Retirement Plans in General

Thinking of Changing Third Party Administration Software Vendor

Looking to change the current software provider for my dc and db administration/testing. Suggestions? Needs to be cost effective.
Number of replies posted  5 replies      Number of times viewed  73 views      Add Reply
 
[Advert.]

ERISApedia.com � Outstanding Content -- Affordable Pricing

Sponsored by Burrmont Compliance Labs LLC
ERISApedia.com: Find out why we are the fastest-growing ERISA Compliance Service in the industry. Outstanding authors, customer satisfaction & support. Contact us to see what we can do for you. sales@ERISApedia.com or 612-605-2266.
Author's photo

pixmax created a topic in 401(k) Plans

ACP Testing Needed for 4% After Tax Contributions in a Safe Harbor Plan?

Plan is Safe Harbor match with a discretionary match and after-tax option. If the plan sponsor does not make a discretionary match and the employees decide to put in a 4% after-tax contribution, does this need to be tested under ACP or can it be avoided?
Number of replies posted  2 replies      Number of times viewed  42 views      Add Reply
Author's photo

JustMe created a topic in Cafeteria Plans

Disability Claims Procedures in FSAs

Do the new disability claims procedures apply to flexible spending accounts?
Number of replies posted  5 replies      Number of times viewed  31 views      Add Reply
Author's photo

Marlene created a topic in 401(k) Plans

415(c) Maximum Contributions

When applying the maximum employer contribution amount to HCEs ($60,000 for 2017 with catch-up), are the deferral amounts deducted from that maximum to equal the actual amounts available for employer contributions?
Number of replies posted  7 replies      Number of times viewed  65 views      Add Reply
Author's photo

Bumppo23 created a topic in Retirement Plans in General

Eligibility Computation Periods; Period of Service and Year of Service Deliberations; May One Use One Approach for a Specific Aspect of a Plan and the Other Approach for a Discrete Aspect of a Plan?

May a plan stipulate that the determination of eligibility for specific aspects depend upon elapsed time while eligibility for discrete specific aspects depend upon years of service/hours of service? As a hypothetical example, the latter specific example could affect a CODA aspect, to mean that a person could not make elective deferrals until the completion of one Year of Service of 500 Hours of Service. Such a bifurcated situation raises the intriguing perhaps conundrum: how does one subsequently determine breaks in service? One-Year-Breaks-in-Service or Periods of Severance? Whichever of the two stand as more favorable to the individual in the respective situation?

See https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p6388.pdf (Employee Plan Deficiency Worksheet, Attachment Number 1, Minimum Participation Standards) which includes this potential issue (i.e., it's sample language that the IRS examiner might use): "To apply the break in service rules, section ___ of the plan should be amended to provide that the computation period used for measuring eligibility service will also be used to measure breaks in service. DOL Regs. section 2530.200b-4(a)(2)."

One of the items on "Worksheet Number 1" in that document states: "When an employee who has satisfied the minimum service requirement and who has no vested benefit has a break in service, and the number of consecutive breaks in service is less than the greater of 5 or the number of years in which the employee attained a year of service, does the employee participate immediately upon returning to work?"

Another one: "Section ___ of the plan should be amended to provide that a vested participant, or a nonvested participant whose prior service cannot be disregarded under IRC 410(a)(5) who is reemployed after a break-in-service (period of severance), will either participate immediately on his or her reemployment commencement date or retroactively as of his or her date of reemployment upon completion of a year of service measured by his or her reemployment commencement date. IRC sections 410(a)(5)(C) and (D) and Regs. sections 1.410(a)-4, 1.410(a)-7(c)(5)."

Finally: "Section ___ of the plan should be amended to provide that a vested participant, or a nonvested participant whose prior service cannot be disregarded under IRC 410(a)(5), who is reemployed after a break-in-service (period of severance), will either participate immediately on his or her reemployment commencement date or retroactively as of his or her date of reemployment upon completion of a year of service measured by his or her reemployment commencement date. IRC sections 410(a)(5)(C) and (D) and Regs. sections 1.410(a)-4."

Number of replies posted  0 replies      Number of times viewed  24 views      Add Reply
Author's photo

austin3515 created a topic in 401(k) Plans

Which Funeral Expenses Are Eligible for Hardship Distribution?

Participant lives in California, and father lives in Delaware. Participant is coordinating the "particulars" of the funeral. Would his air fare/hotel expenses count as funeral expenses? What about his sister who is also coming to the funeral, who might be helping out while she is there?
Number of replies posted  4 replies      Number of times viewed  43 views      Add Reply
Author's photo

Pammie57 created a topic in Retirement Plans in General

1099-R Question: Participant Has a Pre-Tax Account and a Roth Account in the Plamn

If a participant in a 401k Plan has both a pre-tax deferral account and a Roth, then when they take a cash distribution are two 1099-Rs required to report the pretax distribution & the Roth?
Number of replies posted  2 replies      Number of times viewed  26 views      Add Reply
Author's photo

ERISAAPPLE created a topic in Distributions and Loans, Other than QDROs

Calculating RMDs When More Than One Beneficiary

How do you allocate the RMD after a participant's death among multiple beneficiaries, when no beneficiary is an individual (no designated beneficiary)? Is it proportionate? Is there guidance? This is an individual account plan. Example: Participant P dies in 2018. His RMD for 2018 was $200,000. He took out $100,000 in 2018 before he died, so $100,000 remains due. He has three beneficiaries who each receive $20,000 each and then a 4th beneficiary who will receive the rest. Assume that, based on the total account balance, $20,000 represents 5% of the account and the amount that represents the 4th beneficiary's interest is 85% of the account. Assume the remaining RMD of $100,000 is not paid by the end of the year. Would the three owe $2,500 in excise taxes (50% of 5% multiplied by $100,000) and the 4th owe $42,500?
Number of replies posted  2 replies      Number of times viewed  23 views      Add Reply
BenefitsLink.com, Inc.
1298 Minnesota Avenue, Suite H
Winter Park, Florida 32789
(407) 644-4146

Lois Baker, J.D., President
David Rhett Baker, J.D., Editor and Publisher
Holly Horton, Business Manager

Copyright 2018 BenefitsLink.com, Inc. All materials contained in this mailing are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of BenefitsLink.com, Inc., or in the case of third party materials, the owner of those materials. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notices from copies of the content.

Links to web sites other than BenefitsLink.com and EmployeeBenefitsJobs.com are offered as a service to our readers; we were not involved in their production and are not responsible for their content.

Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy