I am looking for 412(i) plan TPA for a 1-person plan for me. Thank you, Ray J. Jr.

[Advert.]

Join us to celebrate the 45th anniversary of ERISA, the 43rd anniversary of the Pension Rights Center, and to honor our Retirement Superheroes! Tuesday, Oct. 29, Washington DC.

A prevailing wage plan is failing ADP and pulls amounts classified as QNECs from the prevailing wage column to assist in the plan passing ADP. The problem is that there are some HCEs who received prevailing wage allocations, and while the QNECs did assist ADP, there were still failures for some HCEs. Some of these HCEs the system is showing need distributions are HCEs who didn't defer anything but only received prevailing wages. Do we distribute this as an ADP failure or is FTW getting it wrong and should only shift NHCEs? If I can somehow force FTW to only shift NHCEs and not HCEs, wouldn't the plan have to pass general testing on amounts that didn't shift to ADP? So basically I need to gauge the failure of each test by not shifting HCE QNECs and dealing with the general test vs shifting HCE QNECs and reviewing the failure in ADP?

A sponsor deconverted from a MEP (9/1/19) and started a new 401k plan (10/1/19). Generally, we write our plan documents for mid year starter plans to have a January 1 effective date and then note effective dates for each plan feature such as Safe Harbor, deferrals that reflect when the plan actually started. We have all calendar year plans and define our compensation as the plan year, writing our docs with those dates allows the sponsor to provide just the one set of compensation (for full 12 months) instead of partial year compensation and statutory. Can we date the doc for this plan like that? If the effective date of the plan is when they were actually with the MEP is that a problem?

How often should participants in a non-safe harbor 401(k) plan be informed that they have the option of investing in a brokerage account? In my situation, participants are either in the Pooled account, or can pull out vested balances to put into brokerage account. They receive annual statements of their balances and vested amount. Information about the investment options is provided in the SPD.

Is there any reason that a cafeteria plan document with a health FSA couldn't (or shouldn't) provide for the automatic inflation adjustment to the dollar limit in section 125(i) rather than amending the document each year to state the dollar amount in effect? This is the standard practice in 401(k) plan documents, but most of the FSA documents I've seen for some reason specify the dollar amount without providing any automatic adjustment for inflation language.

Person in question is the spouse of an employee who is a subscriber of an employer offered health insurance plan, so the insurance is held in the employee's name, but it is the spouse with the inquiry. The spouse has on file with the insurance provider to not provide PHI to the employee subscriber holding the policy. The spouse visited a doctor. The insurance company then sent a follow up letter to the subscriber regarding that visit by the spouse to confirm the visit (specific details of the visit apparently not provided). Spouse felt this was PHI, but upon checking in with the insurance company, spouse was informed that that is not considered PHI. Spouse believes just providing the doctor information to the subscriber is. To be clear this question is about PHI, not the relationship between the employee subscriber and spouse.

A retirement plan was operating as a safe harbor plan -- until they amended their plan as October 21, 2018 to no longer make the safe harbor match. Do they have to be tested for non-discrimination -- as in the ADP/ACP test for 2018? I think so, but just want confirmation. Also, when the top-heavy test is run, it shows that 74% of the account balances belong to the key employees at 12/31/2018. Do they have to make a top contribution for 2018 or 2019 since they were a safe harbor plan as of 12/31/2017?