"We have a participant requesting a Hardship distribution based on: Yes I am backed up on my bills specially my mortgage, car payment and daycare I'm probably overthinking this, but I don't believe it falls under the IRS Hardship rules. I just wanted to confirm."

[Sponsored]

Before the holiday season kicks in, check off your "to-do" list enrolling in Cycle 4! ASC Plan Docs are easy-to-use, integrated & 100% cloud based. Contact us today!

"Plan was amended, HCE's limited to 4.5% deferral. An HCE that termed deferred 28%. So ADP test fails. How do I correct? Is there any basis for refunding the one HCE his excess and not count the refund in the ADP test?"

"I have a non-profit client that provides a very rich taxable reimbursement program for its C-Suite. They've been doing this for over 30 years. They provide annual amounts for which the execs can submit claims for reimbursement that vary based on title (CEOs get $80k whereas a VP may receive $20K). The reimbursement amounts are not limited to medical claims. For example, execs can get reimbursed for payments to his mother's nursing home payments, CPA fees and legal fees. There is no written plan, and only about half of the execs actually utilize the full benefits each year. There are some who have never submitted any reimbursements. Because of the medical reimbursement, I'm certain there are GHP and ERISA implications as well as nondiscrimination issues under Code section 105(h). I've suggested to the client that it's better to provide the amount as a discretionary cash bonus because of the medical reimbursement component and because the amounts are already taxable. I'm receiving push back because the client has been advised that since the benefits are taxable, then the above ERISA, GHP, and 105(h) implications do not apply. They also do not want to actually commit to a specified bonus amount for those who have not utilized the funds. Is there anything else they can consider that wouldn't raise ERISA and other GHP issues? Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill? Would there be nondiscrimination issues since the benefits are taxable?"

"Dad owns 100% of Dad's company. He did a full asset sale to Son (his son, age 21+), who has created a new company for this. The employees are terminating with Dad's Company and are being hired by Son's Company. Dad is terminating his plan effective 1/1/24. Son is looking to start up a plan in early 2025. Are we (they) going to run into the successor plan rules because of the relationship between Dad and Son? There was no direct ownership by Son in Dad's Company, and there is no direct ownership by Dad in Son's company."