Parent is 100% owner of Company. Company has an Employee Stock Purchase Plan under which participants can purchase stock of Company. Parent is selling off Company but wants to continue to offer ESPP benefits, but now participants will have the opportunity to purchase Parent stock, rather than Company stock. We have two choices -- to transfer the ESPP from Company to Parent, or to terminate the ESPP and start a new ESPP at the parent level. Is there any difference as far as securities concerns go? For example, would Parent need shareholder approval either way? Or would transferring the ESPP, as opposed to establishing a new ESPP, save us some of the hassle of setting up an entirely new plan?

[Advert.]

We make the complex world of retirement, benefits, human capital and M&A simpler for organizations across the nation. Learn how!
FINDLEY is: Flexible, Innovative, Nimble, Dynamic, Loyal, Experienced and integritY

Client has combo DB/DC plan. For entire plan year, the DB plan is frozen. For the same plan year, employer makes no PS or match to DC plan and no key employees make 401(k) contributions. Only contributions for that plan year to the DC plan are non-key employee 401(k)s. Both plans are top heavy. Is any top heavy minimum due for the plan year?

When is a contribution considered to be made "by the tax filing deadline?" in regards to being deductible for that plan year? We have a client who waited until the last day to file their taxes and to submit their annual employer match on that same afternoon. The submission missed the recordkeeper's daily cut-off for the ACH pull, so funds were not pulled from the employer bank account until the next day (the day after their tax filing deadline). The funds were deposited to the plan's trust the following day. Is the contribution considered "made" when the transaction is submitted online? Or when the ACH actually pulls? Or when the assets are actually deposited to the trust?

We want to do an early retirement window in which, if participants agree to retire, they get an extra 2 years of service and 2 years of age. For most of our "over-65" folks, the extra service and years won't help them because they are more or less maxed out in the plan. Is this OK? Can we offer an early retirement window that benefits people under 65 more than people over 65? Second, do early withdrawal penalties apply the same for people who retire during an early retirement window? If I terminate employment because of the early retirement window at 54, am I still subject to the 10% penalty, even if the plan is treating me as older for purposes of the window?

Under universal eligibility for 403(b) Plans, I understand all employees working at a rate of at least 20 hours per week are eligible to participate, immediately. Say an employee enters the plan due to hiring status as full time. One year later the employee goes part-time. Can he or she be stopped from continuing to make contributions? I don't think so. Or, say they start making contributions and later in the year it's determined they won't have worked at least 1,000 hours during the year -- could the plan sponsor refund the contributions and deem the employee ineligible?

This has happened to us 3 times in the last 4 months: Client rolled money from an IRA into a 401k plan. IRA sends out a 1099-R with a Code G. IRS sends my client a letter that he owes $X,000 in taxes (which of course causes client to freak out), saying it has received no corresponding Form 5498 that confirms the rollover. But of course a 401k plan is not required to file a Form 5498 when it receives a rollover. Can anyone else see the flaw in the system? Has anyone brought this to the attention of the IRS? We literally have a template letter that we use now to respond. This is ridiculous.

My 10+ year bookkeeper embezzled funds from our corporation. While she was forging checks and sending them to her own credit card and bank accounts and taking expensive trips and living high off of stolen money, she had 10% of her salary withheld, and we matched it 50%. Thus all $235,000 in her 401k represents money she embezzled. Her entire net worth, aside from what may be hidden in some hole, is less than what she embezzled. Now I want to claw it back. Looking for an ERISA attorney. If anybody can help, PLEASE! North L.A. County. By the way, we had her arrested. Anybody know the process? State or Federal? I assume Federal.

The 7-day "safe harbor" under 2510.3-122(a)(2) is for plans with fewer than 100 participants at the beginning of the year. The 80‑120 rule does NOT apply (which is for 5500 purposes only), right? I just saw it used for the 7-day safe harbor deposit rule for a plan with over 100 participants at the beginning of the plan year, so I want to make sure I'm not nuts.