"Here's my friend's situation: She is her S corporation's 100% shareholder. She is, and always has been, the corporation's only employee. For many years, her Section 401(a)-(k) plan has every year received her maximum (including age 50 catchup) elective deferrals as Roth contributions. Every year, she provided herself a nonelective contribution of 25% of compensation. These two subaccounts are a seven-figure sum. She received Vanguard's letter 'Your small-business retirement account is moving to Ascensus[.]' She would prefer to keep her Section 401(a)-(k) plan at Vanguard, but that's impractical. She would prefer no more than small accounts at Ascensus. Why? According to Vanguard, the Ascensus accounts will not be displayed in her Vanguard website. All her investments are with Vanguard. She likes using Vanguard's website as a one-stop. To get the desired display, she is considering a rollover (she's distribution-eligible) of all but about $1,000 of her nonelective contributions subaccount to a new non-Roth IRA, and a rollover of all but about $1,000 of her elective-deferrals subaccount to a new Roth IRA. She would do this before the mid-July transition to Ascensus. The reason for leaving non-zero balances in her two Section 401(a)-(k) subaccounts is so she'll get recordkeeping on the terms Vanguard arranged with Ascensus. She intends to continue her business, and to continue the maximum elective-deferral and nonelective contributions. After each year's contributions, she would direct two partial rollovers into the two Vanguard IRAs, which would never get any contribution beyond rollovers from the Section 401(a)-(k) plan. She would leave in the Section 401(a)-(k) plan enough to pay Ascensus' fees. BenefitsLink neighbors, does this work? Any reason my friend shouldn't do this? Any caution I should explain?"

"Would the Statute of Limitation apply in an Alimony Arrears case for someone with a documented Mental Health and Physical Health Condition?"

"Joe owns 100% of company A, which sponsors a DB plan -- he is the only employee. Joe also owns 79% of company B and the other 21% is held by Bob. Joe is the only employee of company B. A and B are not part of either a controlled group or an ASG. Is Bob permitted to borrow from the DB plan sponsored by company A?"

"We have a calendar year 401k plan that through 12/31/23 had a 1 YOS/1000 hours requirement to enter the plan, with immediate entry upon satisfaction. Effective 1/1/2024, the eligibility was changed to 1 YOS/500 hours with monthly entry. This is small plan and through 2023, several employees hired in 2021 and 2022 did not meet the 1 YOS/1000 hours in any year (or calculation period). But they did have over 500 hours in those years. Ignoring the LTPT aspect for now, would they be 'regular' participants as of 1/1/2024 (since they previously met the new 1 YOS/500 hours requirement) or would they still have to meet the new requirement (1 YOS/500 hours) in 2024, and become eligible 1/1/2025?"