Don’t Think Twice, It’s All Right to Ignore That Late Form 8955-SSA Notice

/in , ,

by Benjamin Gibbons

I have heard from a couple of clients recently who have received a penalty notice from the IRS for purportedly filing a late or incomplete 2022 Form 8955-SSA (the IRS form that plan sponsors use to report terminated participants with vested benefits), despite having timely filed Form 8955-SSA earlier this summer. While initially causing some concern, the IRS recently announced that due to a programming error, the IRS’s system automatically sent out Form 8955-SSA penalty notices to those plan sponsors who had already timely filed their 2022 Form 8955-SSA. Read more

You Make My Dreams Come True! IRS Delays Roth Catch-Ups

/in ,

by Elizabeth Nedrow

You don’t have to be a connoisseur of 1980s pop (we see you, Hall & Oates fans!) to appreciate the relief the IRS granted the retirement industry. In Notice 2023-62, the IRS announced a two-year delay on the Roth catch-up requirements for those earning more than $145,000. All eligible participants – regardless of income – may make catch-up contributions on a pre-tax basis (or Roth basis, at participant election but not required) until January 1, 2026. Read more

Simply Irresistible…To Not Seek Recoupment of Overpayments

/in , , , , , ,

by Lyn Domenick

Many retirement plan errors are inadvertent and involve small dollar amounts. However, the work involved in correcting such errors can be time consuming and burdensome. Fortunately, SECURE 2.0 provides that for certain overpayment errors a responsible plan fiduciary can now decide not to seek repayment. While plan fiduciaries are entitled to seek recoupment of overpayments, subject to some limitations, many plan sponsors will welcome this guidance since it allows them to forego seeking recoupment of overpayment errors.

For example, if a 401(k) plan incorrectly included PTO payouts upon termination in eligible compensation, and thus, applied plan contributions to such ineligible portion, the affected participants would probably not notice and in fact might not reasonably be expected to know whether or not the PTO payout should have been included in eligible compensation in their final paycheck. The dollar amounts of the overpayments would in many cases be small and also would include the participants’ own deferrals. In such a case, the plan fiduciary might reasonably choose to not seek recoupment, while correcting the payroll error going forward. Read more

You Can Count On Me…But Check Your Math When Counting Participants for the 5500 Audit Rule!

/in , , , ,

by Becky Achten

Bruno Mars may be crooning “Count on me,” but make sure you don’t overcount your retirement plan participants! New rules may allow you to leave some employees out of the count, which could save you the expense of the annual audit.

If your retirement plan is considered “large” – generally 100 or more participants – you’re probably in the middle of the Department of Labor required annual independent audit of the financial statements that must accompany the Form 5500. There are a few exceptions to the audit requirement – plans that have less than 100 participants at the beginning of the year and those with between 80 and 120 who filed as a small plan in the prior year. If your plan is just over that 100-participant level, there may be relief on the horizon from the required audit and another reason to keep track of those separated participants. Read more

Crazy Little Thing Called . . . Automatic Enrollment

/in ,

by Leslie Thomson

Secure Act 2.0 requires certain plans to automatically enroll participants once they become eligible to participate. Plans that were established prior to December 29, 2022 are exempt from this new requirement. Plans that are established after December 29, 2022 are subject to the automatic enrollment requirement but not until the 2025 plan year. Read more

Can’t Stop the AI*

/in ,

by Benjamin Gibbons

Today’s Benefits Dial post was written in part by a special guest author, ChatGPT. With all of the buzz surrounding AI chatbots, I decided to see how ChatGPT would do composing a blog post on a somewhat technical but fairly common executive compensation scenario. As discussed below, the results were not so good. Here is our guest author’s blog on the ability to make subsequent deferral elections in a nonqualified deferred compensation plan:

Making a Section 409A subsequent deferral election can be a complex process, but it is an important step for individuals who have previously deferred compensation under a nonqualified deferred compensation plan. The subsequent deferral election allows these individuals to change the timing of their future payments, providing greater flexibility and control over their income streams.

To make a subsequent deferral election under Section 409A, an individual must first meet certain eligibility requirements. Specifically, the individual must have originally deferred compensation under a nonqualified deferred compensation plan that complies with Section 409A, and the election must be made at least 12 months before the original payment date. Once eligibility is established, the individual must submit a written election to the plan administrator outlining the new deferral election terms.

It is important to note that making a subsequent deferral election is not a decision to be taken lightly. There may be significant tax consequences associated with a change in payment timing, and it is important to consult with a tax professional before making any changes to a nonqualified deferred compensation plan. In addition, the plan document may contain specific rules and procedures for making a subsequent deferral election, and failure to follow these rules could result in adverse tax consequences.

In summary, a subsequent deferral election under Section 409A can provide valuable flexibility for individuals who have previously deferred compensation under a nonqualified deferred compensation plan. However, it is important to carefully consider the tax implications and procedural requirements before making any changes to a plan. For more information on making a subsequent deferral election, consult with a benefits attorney or tax professional.

Read more

Video Killed the Radio Star… and RMDs Changed Too

/in , , , , , , , ,

by Lyn Domenick

If you remember that title song then you might remember a time before RMDs. Required minimum distributions (RMDs) have been a fixture of retirement plan operations ever since passage of the Tax Reform Act of 1986. One of the provisions in that law was the implementation of the RMD age starting with age 70-1/2; this partially offset lost revenue from the tax cuts in the bill. Many years later SECURE 1.0 increased the RMD age to 72 effective January 1, 2020. SECURE 2.0 increased the RMD age yet again and enacted other RMD-related changes that impact plan operations as described below. Read more

One Way or Another … Forfeitures Will Have to Be Administered Under Your Retirement Plan, and the IRS Just Proposed New Regulations That Provide Simplified Guidance

/in , , , ,

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

Closing Time…for the COVID-19 National Emergency and Public Health Emergency

/in , , ,

by Benjamin Gibbons

The Biden administration announced on January 30 that the COVID-19 national emergency and the public health emergency will be coming to an end after May 11, 2023. The national emergency is currently set to expire on March 1, while the public health emergency is set to expire on April 11. The President intends to extend both of these emergency declarations through May 11, at which point in time he will issue a declaration to end the emergencies. Read more

Money’s Too Tight to Mention…But Maybe a Student Loan Match Would Help

/in , , , , , , ,

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