"Recordkeeper for ERISA covered 403(b) plan of tax exempt entity offering 'automated' RMD processing including participant communication and automatic payout of RMD if no action taken by participant by certain date. Recordkeeper also advising that plan can 'waive' spousal consent for RMDs. I have been unable to find any authority for this. Anyone else have experience with this?"

[Sponsored]

The IRS identifies incorrect compensation as one of the most common retirement plan qualification errors. Join John Griffin, J.D., LL.M., for a practical review of compensation definitions, testing, correction methods, and compliance issues. Earn 2 CE credits. 

"The situation:

• 401(k) plan participant executes an ambiguous beneficiary designation. Account balance is $100,000
• Participant has two surviving brothers. The beneficiary designation is unclear as to whether one brother receives all $100,000 or whether each brother receives $50,000.
• Employer asks:
  • What is the risk to the plan/employer if a distribution is made? (Obvious to me -- Potential litigation)
  • Does either brother have a right at this point to request and review/examine the beneficiary designation?
  • Can the employer refuse to provide the beneficiary designation to the brother(s) until requested during discovery (if there is litigation)?

Highly self-sufficient employer (i.e., reluctant to hire outside counsel) wants to know its options at this point.

• Make a distribution to one brother and hope everything works out?
• Make a distribution to both brothers equally and hope everything works out?
• Is there anything the employer can do to decrease the risk of one or both brothers initiating litigation?
  • Provide the brothers with the beneficiary designation form, ask if they're OK with splitting 50/50, and have both brothers execute an indemnification/settlement agreement before making the distributions?
  • Can the employer somehow use the ERISA claims procedures to its advantage here?
  • File an interpleader action with the court?

Is there anything else the employer should be thinking/doing to resolve this matter in the least expensive way possible?"

"A participant is still actively employed but the recordkeeper shows a termination date from approximately two years ago. The participant says the date corresponds to moving from part-time to full-time, not an actual termination. The plan's call-center instructions direct the participant to his manager rather than the plan. The manager does not know how to correct the record. The recordkeeper's service team says the plan must submit a new file before the participant can establish deferrals. For those familiar with payroll/recordkeeper administration:

1. What record would typically correct this -- a rehire transaction, employment-status correction, or full eligibility-file update?
2. Which sponsor-side function usually owns it: payroll, HRIS, benefits, or the TPA?
3. Is this normally corrected through the next regular feed or through an ad hoc correction file?
4. Are there controls that identify active employees coded as terminated, or are these usually found only when the employee tries to enroll?
5. What is the normal escalation path when the employee's manager cannot identify the appropriate benefits or payroll contact?"