"In a recent webcast on the 'IRS grab bag' regarding automatic enrollment, it was noted that for plans joining a PEP or MEP -- 'remember -- the determination is based on the participating employer and not the MEP/PEP original effective date'. In this case, I believe that if a plan with an original effective date of 1/1/2020 joins a PEP on 1/1/2023, they are 'grandfathered' and would not be subject to automatic enrollment. The webcast did not address when the PEP was established. However, in a recordkeeper's summary, it is noted 'A pre-enactment single employer plan that merges into a MEP established on or after December 29, 2022 (a post-enactment MEP) will lose its pre-enactment / grandfathered status.' These seem to be contradictions. When I look through Notice 2024-2, I do not find any references to PEPs or MEPs. Is anyone aware of a site that addresses the PEP / MEP establishment date trumps a plan's original effective date?"

"If a participant didn't defer the maximum they could in one plan year, is it allowable to allow them to make a sort of true up contribution and give them the opportunity to make additional contributions for the prior year?"

"Here's my understanding: SECURE Act 2.0 amended IRC section 403(b)(12(A) to make the universal availability rule subject to new ERISA Section 202(c). This means that 403(b) plans can still exclude students and employees who normally work 20 hours per week. But, once an employee who is expected to work less than 20 hours per week meets the definition of LTPT, that employee must be permitted to make salary deferral contributions under the Plan.

"Because the 'student' employee exclusion is not based on service, that classification is not impacted by the LTPT rules.

"The issue where further guidance is needed is how does IRC Section 410(b)(4) impact this. Under IRC Section 410(b)(4), the '20 hours per week' exclusion cannot be used unless all employees within that exclusion category are excluded. Does this mean that if one '20 hours per week' employee later meets the LTPT requirements, then all '20 hours per week' employees must be covered? I think it probably does.

"I do not think 403(b) plan sponsors that are excluding '20 hours per week' employees should necessarily amend their plan to remove the '20 hours per week' exclusion. Here's why: Employers are not required to make non-elective or matching contributions on behalf of participants who are eligible to participate solely by reason of the LTPT rules. If the plan sponsor removes the '20 hours per week' exclusion, then part-time employees become eligible without regard to the LTPT rules. My concern is that the non-discrimination (and top-heavy) rules would now apply to this otherwise excludable classification. Agree, disagree?"

"I was married for 17 years and divorced in 2010. We were supposed to file a QDRO, but none was done because my ex couldn't come up with her half of the costs. We had no assets, and the QDRO was for my retirement. I'm planning on remarrying and I wanted to know: after I remarry, can my ex file a QDRO and try to go after assets acquired after the divorce? Could she go after my new spouse's assets? Or would she be limited to the assets at the time of the divorce? Trying to get some peace of mind since I plan on remarrying soon. I'm starting the process for a QDRO now. Thanks"

"Client left employer a few years ago, after age 55. She had a pension benefit (Defined Benefit Plan) that was from a frozen plan. In 2019, the pension offered a lump sum buyout. They opted to continue to delay starting the pension. In June of 2023, the pension terminated and sent out elections for, again, lump sum, start income now, or delay. Again, they opted to delay. Their plan was to start the pension now, at 62 years old. Normal retirement age is 65. Every communication at every point indicated that they were eligible for Early Retirement, though, as of both the 2019 documents and the 2023 documents. We have it in writing: 'You have met the requirements for Early Retirement as described in the Plan. You are eligible to receive an early retirement benefit at any time between now and your normal retirement date reduced under the terms of the plan.'

"F&G 'issued a group annuity contract' for the pension in December 2023. F&G is now stating that they cannot start their benefit until 2027, when they hit 65 years old. I was certain that the person they spoke with must just have been mistaken, so we logged in, and sure enough: the site shows February 2027 as both the 'Early Retirement Date' and the 'Normal Retirement Age.'

"This is not something they could have changed, correct? ...

"What recourse does the client have in this situation? Unfortunately, I don't have access to the actual plan documents. The annuity certificate has apparently not been issued yet (or at least isn't available on the site yet) and the previous pension service center does not have any documents available. But we do have the election notices from both 2019 and 2023 clearly stating that they are eligible for early retirement."

"Do the ASG management group rules apply to businesses that are service businesses? For example, would it apply to car dealerships? Or so the recipient business who receives the services from a management company have to be a service based company?"

"The plan document uses failsafe YOS language when we enter eligibility that's less than one year and includes hours. See language below for the plan in question:

• (a) Eligibility. Any Eligible Employee who has completed 167 Hours of Service within 2 consecutive months from the initial date of employment and has attained age 21 shall be eligible to participate hereunder as of the date such Employee has satisfied such requirements. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any Employee who has completed a One-Year of Service shall be deemed to have met the service requirement.

"Plan Entry Dates are 1st of the month. Our understanding of the eligibility above is that if an employee does not complete 167 hours in 2 their first two consecutive months of employment. They have to complete 1000 hours in 12 months. For example, if an employee was hired January 23, 2023, on March 23rd they completed 2 months of service and on April 1st they would enter the plan as long as they completed 167 hours within the 2 months.

"However, what if the person only complete 80 hours in the 2 consecutive months. They are not eligible to enter the plan on April 1st, correct? They will now need to complete a year of service which is 1000 hour within 12 months? Let's assume they completed 1000 hours by September 15, 2023. Do you agree that they would be eligible to enter the plan on that date? Some of the confusion here that a few of us believe that the year of service means that they have to complete 12 months of service (January 23, 2023, to January 23, 2024, and the 1000 hours) However, I disagree i believe a YOS only means 1000 hours in this case."

"One of our clients wants to merge a recent acquisition's Plan (Plan B) into their own Plan. Plan B has an enhanced SH Match formula. Plan A's formula is the QACA auto enroll SH Match. Are there any considerations for attempting to do this as of 07/01/24 or best to wait until 01/01/2025? That was my first response but upper management would prefer to do it sooner."

"Participant under 591/2 wants her $6500 cash from a profit sharing plan. How much must be withheld by the plan administrator (is it still 20%) Is the withheld amount sent to the IRS with form 945?"