"I have a highly specific question about QDROs and Defined Benefit plans ... The Divorce was in 2014. The divorce decree gave the ex 50% of her future pension. She is just now looking to retire, 10 years later, and her pension is significantly larger than it would have been at the time of the QDRO. Alternate Payee never received any payments on the pension, and the plan administrator is calculating that alternate payee would be entitled to 50% of the payments as of the date payments start, not as of the QDRO date. I may be wrong, but I think that that means that that, by default, means this was a 'shared payment' QDRO....

"The Alternate payee died in 2018. The plan administrator is interpreting the QDRO to pay the Alternate Payee's survivor (a nephew) the payment instead of 'reverting it' back to her, the participant. (Technically it isn't reverting since it was never paid to him to begin with, but that's the best term I can think of.)

"Can a 'shared payment' QDRO on a DBP even do that? I thought only 'Separate interest' allowed for a survivor.... This pension doesn't even have an option where if the participant herself died her own non-spouse beneficiary could get anything beyond the 10 year life certain option, so how in the heck is the nephew going to be allowed to collect for the rest of the participant's life? ...

"Obviously, an attorney will need to handle it, but I guess what I'm asking is whether it is worth the resources to consult with an attorney ... So my big question is whether benefits administration is interpreting this correctly. I did review the SPD and there is nothing specific to this type of situation, I'm assuming there are internal QDRO procedures that I am not privy to."

"Does anyone file IRS form 945 electronically? If so, what do you use. We are filing paper again for 2023 since the deadline is approaching. We e-file our 1099-Rs."

"An employee elected $3,050 for 2023 FSA. During 2023, the employer began using direct deposit for payroll. The result of the direct deposit is that the payroll company processed the 01/01/2024 payroll early, December 29, 2023. The 01/01/2024 compensation and deductions are now included for all purposes in 2023. So the participant that elected the $3,050 FSA for 2023 has now deferred $3,200 for 2023. It seems to me this is an excess contribution. Does it need to be distributed to the participant as such?"

"We have a profit sharing plan (no 401(k)) that has 1 owner and 1 employee. The owner's compensation is $330,000. The employee's compensation is $200,000. Total compensation is $530,000. Maximum deductible contribution is $132,500. The Plan provisions state the profit sharing contribution is allocated on a pro-rata basis based on compensation. The owner wants to provide himself and the employee with the maximum annual addition of $66,000 or a total contribution of $132,000 or 24.90566% of payroll. In order to provide the employee with a total allocation of $66,000, the pro-rata allocation percentage must be 33% of compensation. However, providing the owner with an allocation of 33% of compensation or $108,900 will violate 415 for the owner.

"Can we limit the owner's allocation to $66,000 and still provide the employee with an allocation of $66,000 or 33% of compensation. I am concerned the IRS would say the terms of the Plan are not being followed because the ending allocation is not pro-rata based on compensation. The Plan states the following in the 415 limitation section: 'If the Employer contribution that would otherwise be contributed or allocated to the Participant's Account would cause the Annual Additions for the Limitation Year to exceed such maximum permissible amount, the amount contributed or allocated will be reduced so that the Annual Additions for the Limitation Year will equal the maximum permissible amount.' This language seems to indicate we can reduce the allocation for the owner to $66,000 and still provide the employee with $66,000."