Individual currently owns a non-qualified VA. He is the owner and annuitant. Contract had a ratchet and guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefit. The ratchet has expired so he is looking at exchanging into a new VA contract. The current contract has the owner as the annuitant and his spouse as designated beneficiary. He is looking at exchanging into a VA where he will be the owner and he and his spouse will be joint annuitants. Does this qualify for a 1035 exchange? Best I've found in trying to research is that the Service has not directly addressed this. The wording in the code and regs is vague at best, saying: The exchange, without recognition of gain or loss, of an annuity contract for another annuity contract under section 1035(a)(3) is limited to cases where the same person or persons are the obligee or obligees under the contract received in exchange as under the original contract. Clearly the current owner/annuitant would be the same obligee. But is the spouse, who is currently the designated beneficiary in the existing contract an "obligee", as she would be under the new joint contract?

So let's assume there is a successor plan rule violation -- 401(k) or 403(b) plan, doesn't matter for purposes of this question. All participants in the terminated plan rolled their assets over to the new plan, which was established prior to the 12-month period. How would one even present this for correction under VCP? Anyone tried this, asking the IRS to allow it, etc.? I don't recall ever seeing this because successor plan questions usually come up prior to the termination of the first plan. Any "fixes" that the IRS has approved? I wouldn't think that this is very common, but maybe it is.

Both Relius and ftwilliam will roll forward a plan and enter the end of year participant counts as beginning of year counts. Are people increasing that figure by the 1/1 entry dates? NOTE: I would, of course, take them into account for purposes of determining an audit requirement. Based on the fact that ftwilliam/Relius pre-fill those figures, I have to make the assumption that they don't think this is a big deal. Just curious if others think maybe it's not worth the time it takes to count them up each year.

A sponsor adopting an open MEP decided to start its own plan. So they gave notice to the MEP and the balances for the active participants were rolled into the sponsors new plan. Balances for terminated people were left in the MEP though. Should the balances for the terminated people have moved as well? Have another recent situation when the plan sponsor was acquired by another company and the acquired sponsor is transferring into the acquiring entity's plan. Again, do the balances for participants terminated prior to the acquisition move into the acquiring entity's plan?

Can a board resolution be used to state the maximum deferral percentage that can be deferred by the HCE group and also state that any amount over the average by any HCE who has or will attain at least age 50 by the end of the 2018 calendar year will be considered a catch-up contribution?