A vested terminated participant has been taking RMDs the last few years from the qualified DC plan using the ULT table (the one that assumes a 10-year younger spouse). Suppose this year we are told that, all along, their spouse (and designated beneficiary) is actually 20 years younger than the participant. Does that mean the joint table (with its larger divisor factors) is required to be used for determining the RMD? If so, was 20% mandatory withholding missed on the non-RMD portion of the amount distributed for the prior years because those amounts could have been rolled over?

[Advert.]

With On-Site Education from the International Foundation, your staff can receive high-quality education in a customized, one-of-a-kind learning experience. Avoid the cost and inconvenience of travel, and let us bring the education to you! Learn More.

Assume that a plan participant is a minor with legitimate plan compensation. The minor’s parent makes the decision for the minor to make an elective deferral contribution to the plan without the minor’s consent (or even their awareness). Would this create an operational failure where the plan document requires the election be made by the participant and doesn’t provide for proxy? Or, would parental rights control here and allow for the parent to make this decision for their child? If the parent has the ability to cause the contribution, would the child have the ability to override the election their parent made?

Client has a safe harbor 401(k) profit sharing plan with a cash balance plan. Plan and tax year are calendar year; 2018 return on extension. The 2018 required contributions are the 3% safe harbor, the minimum cash balance, and the minimum profit sharing to pass nondiscrim. Client does not have the cash to fund everything. What are the ramifications if the client uses all available cash to fund the cash balance to reduce the penalty, but misses the deadlines for depositing the safe harbor and PS. I know the deadline for safe harbor is 12/31/2019, but not so sure about the PS. I know that the PS can be deposited up to 10/15 and still be allocated as 2018 for 415, but what are the ramifications if say both safe harbor and PS are not deposited until after 2019, especially with respect to the 2018 nondiscrimination testing. Compounding the issue is that most of the SH and PS goes to the non-highly. The majority of the CB goes to the owner. So by not funding the SH and PS and using any available cash to fund the CB does that create nondiscrim issues in itself?

We have a 457(f) plan. An executive with a lot of PTO banked has asked whether the unused PTO can be transferred into his 457(f) plan account. Is this permissible? Currently the plan is silent to this, but I imagine it could be amended (if it's legally permissible).

Regarding the 25 employee limit -- [1] Can we exclude union employees)? [2] Can we exclude employees who work less than 1000 hours?

Let's say there are 2 companies in a Control Group. One of them is Safe Harbor, the other one is not. What happens if they fail coverage on their own and must aggregate? I understand that one generally cannot aggregate Safe Harbor and non-Safe Harbor plans, but what would be the way to run testing if this scenario were to happen?

84-year-old retired participant is taking RMDs from qualified plan. He dies in 2018, and his 85-year-old spouse receives the participant's 2018 RMD based on the participant's life expectancy. In 2019, the participant's now-86-year-old spouse must begin taking RMDs based on her life expectancy, which is only 7.1 years. Does the RMD need to be calculated using the Single Life Table? Does she get any break as a spousal beneficiary in the year after her husband's death or is the plan required to treat her as an individual beneficiary? If she rolls the amount out of the plan and into an IRA, does that help reduce the RMDs for future years?

I started our small startup company on a 401k plan a couple of years ago and I'm being told that we're failing the ADP test, probably because we only have 6 people and 3 of them are HCEs. The percentages used by the plan don't make sense to me. After a lot of searching, I finally figured out that they are using the "prior year plan" (I think -- nothing else makes sense). But I still can't figure out who they are counting as an NHCE -- does someone who worked for the company last year (2018) who left the company in 2019 count? What if they joined mid-2018? Does it matter when? What if they joined mid-2018 and left in mid-2019? What if they joined in 2019 -- do they not count at all because of the prior year thing? Does it matter when in 2019 they joined? What if they joined prior to 2018 and then left in 2018? What if they joined prior to 2018 and then left in 2019? Any way for me to understand this would be much appreciated. Does this vary by plan (do I need to ask the plan's unhelpful support team again)?

The company has been part of a PEO 401(k) plan since 2016. The plan has been operating as a safe harbor 401(k) plan. The company is leaving the PEO effective October 1, 2019 and will spin off from the PEO 401(k) plan to a single employer plan. The new plan recordkeeper says it can't accept employee deferrals until November 1 (the company does payroll semi-monthly on the 15th and last day of the month). Is it preferable to draft the new plan document as a restatement of the existing plan with an initial effective date of 2016 and a restatement date of October 1, 2019? The new document will have the same provisions as the PEO plan, with certain changes in eligibility and vesting being effective January 1, 2020. Plan number will be 001. Alternatively, is the new document drafted as a successor plan, with an initial effective date of October 1, 2019? Again, the provisions will be the same as the PEO plan with certain changes effective January 1, 2020. Since the intent is to continue this as a safe harbor plan, is this option viable? The company will be instructed to continue to take deferral contribution deductions from the October 15th payroll even though the remittance to the new recordkeeper will be a little late. Thinking down the road...If the plan is treated as a restatement, how is Form 5500 completed for 2019? If we report opening assets of 12/31/18 account balances is this inconsistent with identifying this as a first return? But, if we report opening assets of zero with a transfer from the PEO plan is this inconsistent with reporting an effective date of 2016? All input is appreciated. Thanks.