"I'm taking over a client and this is the first year I'm operating as the TPA. They do a match, which is funded after the end of the year. Deferrals are allowed immediately; Matching Contributions, you become eligible 1st of the month following the completion of 1 year of service. Currently the Plan does not exclude compensation prior to becoming eligible for the Match. It appears that the previous TPA was matching all deferrals made during the year, as long as the participant became eligible at some point during the year (for example, if someone became eligible on 12/1 all of their deferrals would've been matched up to what the formula allows). My question is if that is allowed? Or are they only allowed to match deferrals made after they would've become eligible for the match?"

"Have 2 participants in similar situations: Participant 1: Was eligible for the Plan, having worked 1,000 hours from 2014-2016 Worked about 250 hours in 2017 Had 0 hours from 2018-2021 Re-hired and worked 900 hours in '22 So it would appear that there was a 5-year break in service. Does that mean that this participant needs to re-establish eligibility, or do they become eligible again from the re-hire date? Participant 2: Was eligible for the Plan, having worked 1,000 hours from 2014-2017 Had 0 hours from 2018-2021 Re-hired and worked '22 This participant only had a 4-year break in service. I believe this means that they do become eligible immediately upon re-hire, since there was no 5-year break. Is that accurate for both participants?"

"Using life insurance in a plan, when you have a sole-proprietor or an owner of a pass-through entity, is there a 1099-R required for the economic benefit (PS 58 cost) for such owner? One argument I've heard is a sole proprietor, or an owner of a pass-through entity, is not entitled to a deduction for that portion of the premium representing the economic benefit under IRC Section 404. Accordingly, Treas. Reg. 1.72-16(2) only is applicable if the deduction is allowed under IRC Section 404. Additionally, the instructions for the 1099-R Box 1 states reporting is required if, '... premiums paid by a trustee or custodian for the cost of current life or other insurance protection ...' It would appear, if the sole proprietor or owner of a pass-through entity is not taking a deduction for the economic benefit (therefore paying taxes on such amount), the trustee or custodian is not paying that cost, would a 1099-R need to be issued?"

"General question for you attorneys out there who deal with health insurance claims and 'clawback' of expenses paid, if a legal settlement is reached I was talking with someone a few weeks back, who had sustained some significant injuries in an auto accident that was the fault of the other driver. Her health insurance had paid significant amounts for medical bills. She was in the process of suing the at-fault driver. I have heard that many health insurance policies require repayment if the injured party receives a settlement, but I don't know anything about it. I asked her if her attorney had mentioned any such thing, and she admitted she didn't know. So I have two general questions: [1] Is it in fact a common clause in health insurance policies to have some sort of 'clawback' or repayment clause in the event of the injured party receiving a settlement? [2] If her attorney DIDN'T mention it, if there is such a clause, would this likely be some sort of legal malpractice? I mean, if the settlement is completely or nearly eaten up by clawback and legal fees, why would anyone go through the agony of a lawsuit?"

"Participant auto enrolled and had three paychecks worth of auto deferrals taken. Then she left the company. Age 31. Can she take a permissible withdrawal (plan allows them) and avoid the 10% penalty tax? Or is that only for in-service withdrawals?"