"A TSP transfer can be implemented with a RBCO even though the parties are not yet divorced. A 'legal separation' is sufficient ... The following laws and regulations make it clear that a FERS COAP can be entered based on 'legal separation' ...

"Maryland recently did away with a 'limited divorce' and the State law provides that only in connection with an absolute divorce or an annulment can the court determine what is 'marital property', the value of such marital property, and make an equitable adjustment by a monetary award that include the entry of a QDRO. 

"In South Carolina, they have what they call a 'Decree of Separate Support and Maintenance' that will be entered by the Court adopting, ratifying and incorporating a 'Complete Support and Property Settlement Agreement' executed by the parties. It is a 'legal separation' accordance with South Carolina case law. The parties must still remain apart to some statutory period of time before they are eligible for a Final Decree of Divorce. 

"So my question is: Do you know of any other ERISA or IRS statutory authority that addresses the interplay between 'legal separation' and the entry of a QDRO, or case law addressing the issue?"

"I have a Nevada client that has had a 401k plan for a few decades. They are concerned that they may have to amend their 401k to incorporate all the provision of the new Nevada state program (e.g. auto enroll). I think they are exempt since they already have a plan. But the way they read it, the exemption is only valid if their plan meets all the provisions of the Nevada state plan. Can anyone confirm the proper interpretation?"

"Plan sponsor fails ADP/ACP testing for the 1/1/2024 to 12/31/2024 plan year and refunds are issued to HCEs on 3/1/2025 (refunds issued by the plan's recordkeeper). On 4/1/2025, the plan sponsor realizes that they mistakenly approved the wrong test and intended to rely on a permissively disaggregated ADP/ACP test (disaggregating otherwise excludable employees). The permissively disaggregated test still failed, but had better results and less refunds to HCEs. 

"Any idea how the plan sponsor goes about this given that refunds have already been issued and cashed? If they intend on relying on the permissively disaggregated results, then are the original refunds deemed impermissible distributions? Do they try to collect the overpayments from the HCEs by following the EPCRS/Secure 2.0 overpayment guidance? For example -- assume HCE Jane received an ADP refund on 3/1/2025 in the amount of $1,500 and cashed the check. But, based on the results of the permissively disaggregated test, her ADP refund was only $800. Does the plan sponsor follow the overpayment guidance in terms of dealing with the $700 'overpayment'?"