By Kevin Selzer
We have now had a couple of months to review and digest SECURE 2.0 (and its roughly 90 provisions impacting retirement plans). If plan sponsors haven’t done so already, it is time to roll up their sleeves and put a triage list together on these law changes. Below are some suggestions on where to start: Read more
by Brenda Berg
One question that often comes up is whether an expense related to an ERISA plan can be paid with plan assets. The decision of whether to use ERISA plan assets to pay an expense is an ERISA fiduciary decision. With the recent IRS guidance clarifying the timing of use of forfeitures, this question may come up even more.[1] Using plan assets inappropriately is a fiduciary breach and subject to possible DOL and IRS penalties. It is important to have a fiduciary process in place for reviewing expenses and determining whether a payment is proper. Read more
by Becky Achten
On February 27, 2023, the Treasury issued proposed regulations intended to simplify and clarify the rules relating to forfeitures within qualified retirement plans.
Defined Benefit Plans
Similar to defined contribution plans, defined benefit plans may use forfeitures to pay eligible plan expenses. However, unlike defined contribution plans, defined benefit plans are prohibited from using forfeitures to reduce required employer contributions. In addition, forfeitures must be used as soon as possible. The proposed regulations eliminate this timing requirement because it conflicts with the minimum funding requirements. Instead, reasonable actuarial assumptions are to be used to determine how expected forfeitures will affect the present value of plan liabilities. The difference between expected and actual forfeitures will then increase or decrease the plan’s minimum funding requirement in future years. Read more
It may be an understatement to say that compliance with benefit plan laws and regulations is becoming increasingly more complicated. In my experience, the COVID era has brought about some of the widest-sweeping changes on the burden of administering benefit plans in some time.
There has been major evolution around service provider fee disclosure, DOL reporting and disclosure on mental health parity and disclosure of plan costs, new claims procedure rights, expanded expectations around Cyber Security protections, and expansion of the use of ESG and crypto currency (and on-again, off-again regulatory efforts). Read more
by Alex Smith
While case law regarding the enforceability of arbitration provisions in ERISA retirement plans has been mixed, since the Ninth Circuit’s 2019 decision in Dorman v. Charles Schwab Corp. enforcing a 401(k) plan’s arbitration provision, some employers and plan sponsors have given increased consideration to adding arbitration provisions to their retirement plans based on that decision and the proliferation of class action ERISA lawsuits. However, following the Tenth Circuit’s February 9 decision in Harrison v. Envision Management Holding, Inc. Board, which appears to be the first time the Tenth Circuit considered the issue, employers based in the Tenth Circuit’s jurisdiction (Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming) may want to think twice before adding an arbitration provision to their plans.
If a 401(k) or 403(b) plan permits employees to take in-service hardship withdrawals in the event of an immediate and heavy financial need, new legislation provides that, effective for plan years beginning in 2023, employers may rely on an employee’s self-certification of the hardship. Prior to this change, an employee was required to substantiate such hardship expenses to receive a distribution on account of financial hardship. Read more
by Lyn Domenick
By now you have probably seen countless summaries of the recently enacted legislation that includes what is commonly known as SECURE 2.0. One of the new features that has been brewing for a while is the concept of a 401(k) plan match based on qualified student loan payments for its eligible employees. Because this is effective January 1, 2024, interested plan sponsors should begin now evaluating the merits of adding such a program. The student loan match provision permits (but does not require) a plan to contribute matching contributions based on the amount of qualified student loan payments made by its employees who are otherwise eligible to make deferrals under the 401(k) plan. The plan must match qualified student loan payments on the same basis as elective deferrals under the plan, including the application of any plan or IRS limits on the amount that is matched and on the match itself. If a participant is making both elective deferrals and paying on a student loan, the matching formula would be applied to both (subject to applicable limits). Eligible participants would self-certify that they are making qualified student loan payments, which avoids the need for the sponsor to verify payment. Student loan matching contributions may also be implemented in a 403(b) plan or governmental 457(b) plan. Read more
During the pandemic, the IRS on multiple occasions provided relief from the requirement that a person be physically present for certain paperwork associated with retirement plan distributions. (See our blog posts of June 4, 2020 and January 25, 2021, and also IRS Notices 2020-42, 2021-3, 2021-40 and 2022-27.) Apparently acknowledging that the new remote procedures are sufficiently reliable, the IRS is proposing to make them permanent. Read more
by Lyn Domenick
The IRS has announced the 2023 cost of living adjustments to qualified plan limits. As expected, many of the limits increased substantially compared with prior years. Below are the highlights, and our full historical chart can be found here for easy reference.
| 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
| Annual Compensation | 330,000 | 305,000 | 290,000 |
| Elective Deferrals | 22,500 | 20,500 | 19,500 |
| Catch-up Contributions | 7,500 | 6,500 | 6,500 |
| Defined Contribution Limit | 66,000 | 61,000 | 58,000 |
| ESOP Distribution Limits | 1,330,000 265,000 |
1,230,000 245,000 |
1,165,000 230,000 |
| Defined Benefit Limit | 265,000 | 245,000 | 230,000 |
| HCE Threshold | 150,000 | 135,000 | 130,000 |
| Key Employee | 215,000 | 200,000 | 185,000 |
| 457 Elective Deferrals | 22,500 | 20,500 | 19,500 |
| Taxable Wage Base | 160,200 | 147,000 | 142,800 |
The IRS has picked up where it left off last month with additional retirement plan amendment deadline extensions. As you may recall from our August 5, 2022 blog post, Time Is On My Side: Some Retirement Plan Amendment Deadlines Pushed Back, the IRS recently extended certain SECURE Act, Miner’s Act, and CARES Act amendment deadlines for retirement plans but notably did not extend the deadline for coronavirus-related distributions and loan plan loan relief under the CARES Act. While it is unclear whether those omissions were intentional or an oversight, the IRS has rendered that question moot in IRS Notice 2022-45. Read more