Get the Message Boards Digest by Email
BenefitsLink.com logo   

BenefitsLink® Message Boards Digest

January 24, 2024

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

LANDO created a topic in 401(k) Plans

Correcting Missed Deferral Opportunity on Retroactive Overtime Pay

"I have a sponsor that changed payroll systems in 2021. As a result of that change , overtime was not calculated correctly in 2021 through 2023 for a group of participants. Sponsor self-discovered the error in late 2023 and paid this group of employees back pay on a separate 10/20/2023 payroll. The plan is a 401(k) deferral only plan covering only collectively bargained employees. The plan does not include an automatic contribution arrangement. According to their plan document, the back pay is eligible compensation/allocation pay. The sponsor did not take elective deferrals for this separate payroll. We didn't learn about this issue until after 1/20/2024. No notice has been provided to the affected participants. I'm trying to figure out if there is a way to turn this into a notice only or zero QNEC correction. My conservative view is that correct deferrals began with the payroll following 10/20/2023, which would have started the 45 day clock for a notice only correction. Thoughts?"

1 reply so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

DocumentDiva created a topic in 401(k) Plans

Coverage and Safe Harbor Match

"I have two 401(k) Plans that are a controlled group, and they fail both 410(b) and average benefits tested separately. I'm testing them together, but the issue is one plan has a basic SHM and the other plan has an enhanced safe harbor match of 100% up to 4%. I believe that both plans should have the same match formula but I'm having difficulty putting my eyes on any articles or regs saying this to confirm what I believe. I read something recently where it mentions if there's a 3% safe harbor non-elective then both plans should have the same formula and the plan without the 3% would have to give the 3% to the eligible participants. Has anyone else ran into this issue with safe harbor match plans that are required to be aggregated for testing?"

3 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

SundanceKid created a topic in 403(b) Plans, Accounts or Annuities

Correcting Employee Contribution Incorrectly Classified as Employer Contribution

"I have an issue where a 2023 contribution that was intended to be made as an employee contribution was erroneously made as an employer contribution (due to a new employee being unaware of the correct forms to use). Can this contribution be recharacterized as an employee contribution? If so, would we use ECPRS or VCP?"

2 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

Plan Doc created a topic in Church Plans

NQDC Church Plan: Eligibility and Vesting

"Can/must a church having a 501(c)(3) determination and offering a nonqualified deferred compensation plan limit eligibility to a 'top-hat' group? Also, as I understand 457(f) doesn't apply in the case of a church employer, can plan accounts avoid current taxation upon vesting, as usually occurs with other tax-exempt organization nonqualified plans?"

5 replies so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

AlbanyConsultant created a topic in Retirement Plans in General

Pro Rating the SSTWB Integration Limit in a Short Year (Plan Terminated)

"I'm doing a final PS allocation for a calendar year plan that was terminated 9/15/23. That was the final pay date before they were purchased, and all payroll stopped then, and the purchase agreement required that the plan be terminated as of that date. I couldn't convince them to let the plan run until 12/31/23. The PS formula is integrated at 80% SSTWB + $1. So for 2023, if it was a full calendar year, that would be $128,161. x8.5 /12 = $90,780.71 (or something like that, depending on when you add the extra dollar). The question is what to do with the integration level. This is below 80% of the annual limit, so do I have to use 4.3? Or do I get to still use 5.4% because it's 80%+ of the applicable limit once the pro rating is considered? My software gives me an error on the latter because 56.667% of the TWB is not at least 80%."

1 reply so far   |    Click Here to Add a Reply

Basically created a topic in Retirement Plans in General

Sole Prop, PS Plan, Contribution Calculation

"I just need some clarification. I know how to do the calculation. The profit figure to use is line 7 of the Schedule C? Line 7 profit multiply by 1402(a)(12) deduction (.9235) calculate and deduct FICA calculate and deduct MED Back into plan contribution Add it all up and the result is Line 7 Right? I want to explain it succinctly to the financial advisor."

4 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 DC/DB Administrator

DC/DB Administrator  View details

HowardSimon
Remote

View job as DC/DB Administrator for HowardSimon
►View More Jobs

►Post a Job

►Get Instant Job Alerts

BenefitsLink.com, Inc.
56 Creeksong Road
Whittier NC 28789
(407) 644-4146

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

Copyright 2024 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 the production of such links and are not responsible for their content.

Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy