BenefitsLink.com logo   

BenefitsLink®
Message Boards Digest

September 11, 2023

Here are the most recently added topics on the BenefitsLink® Message Boards:

stayingbusy created a topic in Other Kinds of Welfare Benefit Plans

Coordination of 529 and 127

"Any insight on how a 529 and 127 plan would coordinate with each other? Code 529 talks about coordination with ESA and American Opportunity and Lifetime Learning credits, but nothing re: 127 plans."

No replies yet   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

austin3515 created a topic in 401(k) Plans

Entity Adopting Safe Harbor 401k Mid-year as Participant Employer

"I've tried and failed to find out if an entity with no plan currently can adopt the Plan mid-year. Parent bought the stock recently, and are within the transition window but they want to add them mid-year, 2016-16 references amendments, but I think that's different than adding participating employers (i.e., adding a Participant Employer is not an amendment and so doing so is not covered by 2016-16). My own personal conclusion is as long as they are on by 10/1 it should be ok because they would be able to set up their own SH 401k plan in that scenario but I can't find anything at all on point."

4 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

AlbanyConsultant created a topic in 401(k) Plans

'Non-Working Partner' - Count as an Employee?

"I'm working with a partnership that is split 95%/5%. I'm being told that the 5% partner isn't really an employee - they perform no services for the entity. I think that I'm able to exclude them from any plan consideration, yes? Does your answer change if I add the detail that the two are married to each other?"

5 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

CKocher created a topic in Retirement Plans in General

Should Form SF Be Filed After Divorce with a Owner and Spouse Plan?

"A one participant plan covering owner and the spouse. Should 5500 SF be filed after divorce, if the non-owner spouse stays as participant?"

5 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

CKocher created a topic in Retirement Plans in General

Non-PBGC Plan Filing for Standard Termination?

"If the plan is not covered by PBGC, is it required to file with PBGC for a Standard Plan Termination?"

2 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

longjongbongkingkong created a topic in 401(k) Plans

Do California Requirements for Payment of Final Wages Apply to 401(k) Plan Balance?

"So I have a big question regarding final pay, and if my 401k should be included as final wages. I worked for Home Depot for 9.5 yrs, I am 100% vested in my account, valued at about 36k$. Home Depot has been dragging their feet. I left Home Depot to go work for the State of California. I have called Home Depot's benefits center multiple times and they will not cash out my 401k until after 30 days past my termination date. California law requires payment of 'wages' on your final day if you gave enough notice, which I have.... IF 401k counts as wages, then I'm owed the maximum pay out, 30 days or 240 hours of pay.... Does anyone have any information regarding 401k needing to be paid out on your last day of work of if its considered 'Wages'??"

3 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

Dougsbpc created a topic in Plan Terminations

Funding a Terminated DB After Benefits Paid Out?

"DB Plan for a small law firm with 5 participants. Non-PBGC. Plan terminated 9/15/2022 and all benefits were paid by 10/15/2022. There remains about $5,000 which they will use to pay our fees for the termination and administration. The 100% shareholder took a $70,000 haircut to his benefits when distributions were paid. The 100% shareholder now wants to fund $65,000 from the company for 2022 only to himself in the terminated defined benefit plan and then take a distribution of the $65,000. This to make up for the haircut he took. Does anyone think there would be a problem with this?"

4 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

Tom created a topic in 401(k) Plans

Safe Harbor Plan with Different Eligibility for Deferrals and Safe Harbor

"We have a plan with immediate eligibility for elective deferrals and delayed eligibility for the safe harbor match (I believe the standard 12-month with entry date). I know the ADP test is required for the <1 year group and the exclusion rule can be used, so the ADP test is not an issue. Someone in this group mentioned in the past though that top-heavy could be an issue. So when only safe harbor match is funded, no profit sharing, this plan is not deemed to meet top heavy rules because of the differing eligibility? And not only that, all participants would be eligible for the top heavy contribution if the plan were top heavy. Fortunately it is not but climbing and getting into the danger zone -- approaching 50%. We always applied top heavy 3% to plans with different eligibility when profit sharing was funded. 90% of our plans are top heavy and have same eligibility for all sources. But this plan with only delayed safe harbor is a unique plan for us."

6 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

Here are the most recently posted jobs on EmployeeBenefitsJobs.com, a service of BenefitsLink:

View job as Sales Consultant

Sales Consultant  View details

Great Lakes Pension Associates, Inc.
Remote / MI

View job as Sales Consultant for Great Lakes Pension Associates, Inc.
►View More Jobs

►Post a Job

►Get Instant Job Alerts

BenefitsLink.com, Inc.
(407) 644-4146

Lois Baker, J.D., President
David Rhett Baker, J.D., Editor and Publisher

Copyright 2023 BenefitsLink.com, Inc. All materials contained in this mailing are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of BenefitsLink.com, Inc., or in the case of third party materials, the owner of those materials. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notices from copies of the content.

Links to web sites other than BenefitsLink.com and EmployeeBenefitsJobs.com are offered as a service to our readers; we were not involved in their production and are not responsible for their content.

Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy