"Although I've prepared 100's of 5500's in the past, that was when we used paper. I don't know how to complete a 5500 so my client can file on EFast. I've subbed out 5500's to a CPA firm for years, but this new client does not want his 401(k) and PS Plans information shared outside of my office. I realize 5500s are public record anyway, but I want to honor the client's wishes. Where do I prepare his 5500's for him?"

[Sponsored]

The APC includes eleven sessions on the latest legislative updates from our panel of six ERISA experts. The 401(k) Plans: Beyond the Basics Webcast will follow next on Oct. 28 and 30, and Nov. 1, 2024. View complete agendas and register here.

"I am working with a client regarding an inheritance from a 401K plan that has some unusual moving parts. The client is the personal representative of his uncle's estate. The facts of the situation are as follows:

• Uncle dies in 2021 and has 401k assets at their employer with no stated beneficiary
• Wife of uncle (aunt) does nothing with the assets
• Aunt dies in 2024 and personal representative discovers Uncle's 401k assets at employer.
• Uncle has a will that specifies that retirement assets upon his death will end up in a trust. Trust has named, identifiable beneficiaries.

Probate proceedings started on the Uncle because they were never done in 2021 with the court ordering the 401k assets to be paid to the trust. The PR wishes to go down the road of seeing if the situation would qualify for see-through treatment rather than the distribution being taxable to the trust and subsequent beneficiaries. Since the 401k company was not notified by October of the year following the Uncle's death, I believe this automatically disqualifies the assets (amongst other issues)."

"I am employed by a New York company (since the early 1990s) where I had initially been in their defined contribution pension plan. In the early 2000s we were told about the option to switch to a cash balance pension plan or stay with the defined contribution plan. I vaguely remember a website we were instructed to visit in the 2000s where we were to make some type of choice regarding staying/leaving the defined contribution pension for the cash balance pension. I don't have any recollection of what choices there were to make, what the website looked like, or even what would happen if I did not go online and just ignored making any choice. Fast-forward 30 years and the 3rd-party website our company uses to manage/display retirement benefits shows I'm in a cash balance plan. But, here's the thing.... I'm almost positive that I did not accept being changed to the cash balance plan (as I remembered my colleagues' advice to stay in the defined contribution plan) and so I'm considering pressing HR/Retirement departments at our organization for actual proof/documentation/signatures/etc. for this change I supposedly authorized. NOTE: I understand that I should have paid more attention over the last couple of decades to my retirement plans, but as a young employee back then I just 'set it and forget it'. Now that retirement is in sight I'm trying to understand what income will be available to me. Also, I'm of the belief that it's entirely possible I did accept switching plans and just didn't remember doing so (but I still would like proof). What types of documentation does my employer by law have to provide to show I gave permission to switch plans? Is there a statue of limitations with my challenge?"

"I am a sanctioned man through penalties on interest-bearing accounts. I have never had an employer hear my situation and then reject my waiver of rights to participate in a 401k, thus marking me ineligible, and life continues ... until now. My current employer is fighting me every step of the way. This new company has auto-enrollment AND yearly escalations. Considering I am fined $15k for every individual contribution and $1,500 on every $0.01 of interest earned, for life, I will never be participating. The auto-escalation then sits like an anvil over my head. The DOL has written my employer urging them to accept my waiver and have the administrator draw up a one-off that applies to me, make me ineligible, and that's that. Again, they refuse, citing, 'We CAN force you to do this. Therefore, we ARE forcing you to do this.' They also COULD accept my waiver, but I digress. What recourse do I have here?"

"I have a client that maintains a Top Hat Plan for certain employees. They have a Participant that separated from service in January of this year. The client has no distribution election form on file and the Participant has no recollection of ever being given one. The Plan is not clear on how distributions are to be made in default of an election. Here are the provisions on Distributions ... Appreciate any thoughts on how payments should be made, whether this is a provision of the Plan that could be amended to provide for an explicit default payment method, and whether there are any issues with delaying commencement of payments after the required 60 days (although, still in same taxable year so maybe not as big of an issue)."

"I work for a large physician group. The majority of our workforce are HCEs. We have one health plan with no class distinctions listed in the plan document. All physicians and employees are eligible for the same plan with the same eligibility rules. Here is the contribution structure for non-physicians and the CEO: EE-100%, EE+SP-$400, EE+CH-$250, FAM-$550. Now this is only for the Employees. For physicians we pay 100% of all plans including dependents. Is this plan considered discriminatory? We have passed 125 testing as we are not required to report the premiums paid if the ER pays 100%. Now if the physician works less than FT hours, we do charge them for that portion of the ERs cost of their benefits so in a way we are not treating them the same. In my past life we recommended another physician group to gross up salaries for the physicians so that we show that we are treating everyone the same. What is your recommendation? We have never done 105(h) testing and not sure if we need to do so."

"Employer A sponsors safe harbor plan. Employer B sponsors non-safe harbor plan. B purchases 100% of the stock of A, mid-year. Wants to merge plans more or less immediately. Since 1.401(k)-5 dealing with mergers, etc., is 'reserved' there's no solid guidance on this subject. Given that, do you think it is permissible, since plan A uses the 'maybe not' notice, to do the merger if the 30-day advance eliminating the Safe Harbor notice is used? Is it permissible to use less than 30 days ... [T]he purchasing employer, in its merger documents and its plan, would have to address all the coverage, nondiscrimination, protected benefits issues, etc. Both plans are calendar year.... [A]pparently all employees of A have already been moved to B -- no further pay from A will be made. And B's plan was already amended to allow immediate eligibility for A's former employees. So a 30 day advance notice ain't possible. It doesn't seem reasonable that in such a merger/acquisition situation that A's safe harbor would be blown and ADP testing required, but again, no firm guidance...."