During an audit of a 401(k) Plan, the IRS auditor has informed the plan sponsor that they've used the incorrect definition of compensation in withholding from eligible employees. They are requesting that the sponsor go back to 2002 to make the appropriate corrections. The plan sponsor no longer has the payroll records back to 2002, but does have the compliance testing from their TPA (who is no longer in existence). Can they use the compensation information from these tests in order to perform the calculation, informing the IRS that this is all they have and it's their best estimate as to the amounts due? The plan sponsor is doing the corrections on their own. Second, during this whole thing, the plan sponsor went bankrupt in 2001, and emerged from bankruptcy in 2005. They are wondering if they could be responsible for the corrections during a period of time where they were bankrupt.

[Advert.]

Prepare for and add value to meetings with prospective and current clients with our Plan Data Intelligence/Operational Benchmarking tool. Customize with your logo/color themes. Contact us 612-605-2266, sales@ERISApedia.com.

How long must a TPA of NQDC plans retain records for a terminated client? Is 7 years the norm? Can it be a shorter time period? What are general guidelines typically followed by other TPA firms for records retention related to NQDC plans and terminated clients?

Company A, which sponsors a 401k plan, is owned 80% by Joe and 20% by Mike. Only Joe is employed by Company A. Mike also owns 100% of Company B. Although both companies frequently work together for a common client, they would not be considered ASG members because they are in the construction business and therefore are not not service organizations. Would an ASG situation exist if Mike were to become an employee of A without anything else changing?

We have a realtor who is an LLC and files as a sub-S. Spouse is an attorney (professional association with 5 employees). Would the realtor LLC be able to qualify as a SLOB and adopt a defined benefit plan?

Non-profit organization has two full-time employees in management positions, neither of which is highly compensated. They also have nurses who are on-call and will receive $2-$4 per hour for being on-call. Each nurse is on-call 24 hours per week, which means a nurse would have 1,000+ in a year just for on-call time. A nurse may be called in on a case, and would be paid regular hourly compensation (at a nurse's regular pay rate) for those hours. The question is whether a 401(k) plan can exclude the on-call time and pay for eligibility, participation and contribution calculations.

When is a participant permitted to resume his/her 401k deferral contributions following his/her 2018 Hardship distribution 6 month suspension period? Is it immediately, or must he/she wait until the plan's next permitted "change", e.g. if plan permits quarterly changes, must he/she wait until the 1st of the next quarter following expiration of the suspension period? Plan provides 6 month suspension. Plan is safe harbor 401k. Plan provides the participant must complete a new election following the 6 month suspension because the election is deemed to be zero at the point of hardship distribution. Generally speaking, participants may commence or change their deferral elections quarterly (Jan 1, Apr 1, Jul 1, Oct 1).

If husband at age 70.5 elected a 100% J&S annuity and passed away, can the surviving spouse now take a lump sum that is equivalent to her receiving a monthly annuity (i.e., a lump sum of the $7,500 monthly that she is supposed to receive)?

In thinking about a standard non-qualified SERP plan for a tax-exempt organization (a nonaccount balance plan), would the remuneration under Notice 2019-09 be the same as for FICA purposes? In general, it seems they would be the same.

The IRS User Fee Schedule (Appendix A, IRB 2018-1) does not show the user fee for an application to waive minimum funding and the Rev. Proc. refers back to 2004-15 which refers back to 2004-8, which shows a user fees of $2,290 (waiver <$1M) and $5,415 (waiver =>$1M). It doesn't look like any of these rules have been updated. Are these still the fees?

I'm confused by the recently proposed excepted benefit HRA that would allow an HRA to reimburse dental/vision premiums and other ACA exempt benefits if eligible employees are also offered group health plan coverage. I thought current rules already allow for a limited scope HRA that reimburses dental/vision expenses only (including premiums) as long as they are not an "integral part of a group health plan" or they are provided "under a separate policy, certificate, or contract of insurance" (such as an individual dental/vision policy). What am I missing?

Is it possible to use a definition of compensation that passes 414(s) testing when the plan's design is using a safe harbor enhanced match per pay? My fact set is the plan was designed to exclude pay in excess of $125,000. Since this is a 403b plan, the safe harbor design is used to pass the 401(m) test. The formula is 100% on 4% salary deferred with comp for employees capped at $125,000. Since the only employees impacted by the cap are HCEs, the 414(s) testing passes. But now I am wondering and am getting conflicting answers with some research I am doing that even allows a Safe Harbor plan to exclude any forms of pay even if the exclusions passes 414(s) testing.