The Maximum QACA Automatic Increase Percentage is Movin’ on Up

/in , , , ,

A Brief Summary of Recently Issued IRS Safe Harbor 401(k) Plan Guidance

By Benjamin Gibbons

For those of you who have been following along at home (literally these days), you know that the SECURE Act, which was passed only at the end of last year (though it feels like forever ago), instituted a wide range of retirement plan changes, including a number of changes with respect to safe harbor 401(k) plans. On December 9, 2020, the IRS issued guidance on these safe harbor changes in the form of Notice 2020-86.

More specifically, the SECURE Act (in part): (1) increased the maximum automatic contribution percentage for qualified automatic contribution arrangement (QACA) safe harbor 401(k) plans from 10% to 15%; (2) provided plan sponsors the ability to implement a retroactive safe harbor nonelective contribution during a plan year (generally provided the plan is amended at least 30 days before the end of the plan year); and (3) eliminated the safe harbor notice requirement for most plans with safe harbor nonelective contributions. The Notice, in Q&A format, provides additional guidance on each of these SECURE Act changes. A brief summary of the key provisions of the Notice follows. Read more

Your [es]Cheating Heart … Might Be Useful to Retirement Plans Dealing With Missing Participants

/in , , , ,

by Beth Nedrow

Retirement plan administrators have for years sung the sad lament of what to do with missing participants. Ol’ Hank Williams himself could have written a hit song about the problem. Recent guidance from the IRS may have the retirement community singing a slightly different tune, however.

The hassle of keeping plan accounts open for lost or deceased former employees can be a real problem, especially for terminating plans. When participants go missing, retirement plan administrators have few alternatives. One alternative that has been discussed is the use of state unclaimed property funds (sometimes called by their old-fashioned name, “escheat” law). Plans previously were reluctant to escheat unclaimed retirement accounts to state funds due to concerns over how to report tax and withholding. But recent guidance from the IRS (Revenue Ruling 2020-24) makes clear that if a plan escheats funds to the state, it is appropriate for the plan to treat the payment as being includible in gross income and subject to federal income tax withholding, reportable on a Form 1099-R.

Read more

I’m Just Waiting on an… End to the Extended ERISA Deadline Periods

/in , , , , , , , , , ,

by Brenda Berg

Early in the pandemic, the IRS and DOL issued a temporary rule (published May 4, 2020) extending certain deadlines applicable to retirement plans and health and welfare plans. (See Deadlines and Commitments: DOL and IRS Temporary Rule for COVID for more information about that extension.) Under that temporary rule, the deadlines were generally extended until 60 days after the announced end of the National Emergency due to COVID-19, which was referred to as the “Outbreak Period.” The deadlines are essentially “tolled” during the Outbreak Period. The National Emergency began on March 1, 2020, as declared by President Trump’s Proclamation.

The examples in the temporary rule assumed an end date of April 30, 2020 for the National Emergency, which would have extended the Outbreak Period through June 29, 2020. As we all now know, this National Emergency did not end on April 30, and in fact it is still in place. So we are still waiting for the National Emergency period to end and trigger the normal deadlines.

Read more

That’s Life . . . New Defined Contribution Plan Disclosures

/in , , , ,

By Kevin Selzer 

What’s in a number?  Retirement plan participants may soon better understand how account balances translate to retirement readiness.  The SECURE Act enacted last December requires defined contribution plans to show participants the value of their account balances if converted into a monthly lifetime stream of income.  The disclosures are aimed at reminding participants that retirement plan balances are meant to last for life – and busting the “wealth illusion” that single sum account balances present.  

The details on the disclosures are starting to take form following an interim final rule recently released by the Department of Labor (“DOL”).  Under the interim final rule, plans must provide participants with two lifetime income illustrations: the value of the benefit converted to (1) a single life annuity, and (2) a qualified joint and 100% survivor annuity (assuming the participant is married with a spouse of equal age). The DOL clarified in the final rule that the projections will be based on the participant’s current account balance (rather than a future projected value) and will show what that balance would buy purchasing an annuity at age 67 (or the participant’s actual age, if older).

Read more

Wait a Minute Mr. Postman . . . COBRA Litigation Update

/in , , ,

by Kevin Selzer

We have been monitoring an increase in litigation relating to COBRA election notices in recent months.  The plaintiffs in these cases allege that COBRA election notices are deficient, and as a result, the plaintiffs, on a class basis, should be awarded a $110/per day per participant penalty (among other relief).  Many of these cases allege deficiencies on notices that are substantially similar to the Department of Labor’s model notice. 

While none of these cases have fully worked through the courts, a number have settled for significant sums.  The settlement success has predictably spurred more complaints and suits.

Read more

Tell Me Something Good: IRS Eases Restrictions on Mid-Year Changes to Safe Harbor Contributions

/in , , , ,

by Brenda Berg

The IRS has eased the restrictions on mid-year changes to safe harbor contributions, in response to the hardships caused by the coronavirus pandemic.

Employers are generally not allowed to reduce or suspend safe harbor matching or nonelective contributions mid-year unless either (1) the annual safe harbor notice included a statement that the employer could amend the plan mid-year to reduce or suspend the safe harbor contribution, or (2) the employer can demonstrate that it is operating at an economic loss during the plan year. Even if the employer satisfies one of these requirements, the employer must provide a 30-day advance notice before the effective date of the suspension. The suspension of the safe harbor contribution will also mean that the plan becomes subject to nondiscrimination testing for the current plan year.

Read more

Into the Mystic . . . Employee Benefit Considerations for Returning Workers

/in , , , , , , , ,

by Kevin Selzer

Many employers are venturing into uncharted waters as significant numbers of employees are being rehired or returning from extended leaves of absence (e.g., furloughed employees). In this environment, it can be easy to overlook the employee benefit plan implications of this workforce shift. Below are some best practices for employers faced with employees returning to work.

Ensure that retirement plans are crediting service for returning employees correctly. In most cases, employers will not be able to treat a rehired employee as a new employee for retirement plan purposes. This means that the employer will have to consider the employee’s prior service for purposes of determining proper eligibility and vesting credit. This is a good time for employers to check and confirm that any systems that track service (e.g., payroll systems and the retirement plan administrator’s systems) are configured correctly to credit prior service.

Read more

Might as Well Face It… Your Annual Retirement Plan Audit is Not a Clean Bill of Health

/in , , , , , ,

by Ben Gibbons

With calendar year-end Form 5500s due on July 31, or October 15 with an extension (and still no COVID-19 filing relief as of the date this blog was published), it’s that time of year where plan sponsors begin thinking about their annual retirement plan independent audits.  However, these are not the only audits companies should be thinking about.

Both the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Department of Labor (DOL) routinely select qualified retirement plans for examination.  In the event of an audit by either agency, a plan’s records, procedures and processes will be examined.  If errors or deficiencies are found, at a minimum, corrections will be required, and in some instances, fines or sanctions will be levied.

Read more

We Interrupt this Program – What in the SECURE Act Do Retirement Plan Sponsors Need to Pay Attention to in 2020?

/in , , , , , , , ,

by Brenda Berg

After being on the verge of enactment last spring but failing to pass, the SECURE Act is now law. The Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019 – the SECURE Act – was enacted on December 20, 2019 as part of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020.

Although this legislation is considered major retirement plan legislation, it doesn’t have many immediate impacts on most employer retirement plans. Plan sponsors need to pay attention to the following items – for the most part, the other changes (such as pooled employer plan opportunities and annuity payouts) do not require immediate action.

Read more

I Want to Know, Have You Ever Seen…your plan documents?

/in , ,

by Ben Gibbons

Owners and employees of smaller organizations often find themselves stretched in many directions.  With all of the demands on one’s time associated with operating a business, it is not uncommon to see attention to the organization’s medical and other benefit plans pushed to the back burner.  As a result, smaller organizations tend to rely heavily on their benefits broker for their employee benefit plan documentation.  While brokers can be an excellent resource, plan sponsors need to be aware that the services provided by a broker can vary widely from one broker to the next.

Read more