Home
Retirement News
Retirement Forum
Introduction

Site Search
Article archives
Submit your article
XML News Feeds
Register
Login
Mailing List
Retirement News
401K
* 401k Articles
* 401k News
* 401k Help
* 401k Forum
Pension Protection Act
ERISA
Retirement Headlines
* Retirement Headline News
IRA
* IRA news
* IRA Rollover
Retirement Planning
* Retirement Planning News
529
* 529 News
Wealth Management
* Wealth Management News
Investment
* Investment News
Roth IRA
Roth 401k
* Guidelines and Rules
* Roth 401k Articles
* Roth 401k News
* Roth 401k Help
* Roth 401k Forum
SEP IRA
* Guidelines and Rules
* SEP IRA Articles
* SEP IRA News
* SEP Help
* SEP IRA Forum
SOLO 401k
* Guidelines and Rules
* Solo 401k Articles
* Solo 401k News
* Solo 401k Help
* Solo 401k Forum
SIMPLE IRA
* Guidelines and Rules
* SIMPLE IRA Articles
* SIMPLE IRA News
* SIMPLE IRA Help
* SIMPLE IRA Forum
 

IRS Attacks 401k Part-time Employee Exclusions and Your Determination Letter is useles implement the one technique to avoid 401k Plan Disqualification

Posted by Roth-IRA-401k on: 2006-03-26 18:44:36 in category:
401(k) [ Print | Permalink / 0 Comment(s) ]



The IRS issued the February 14, 2006 Quality Assurance Bulletin dealing with 401k plan exclusions of part-time, temporary, and seasonal (A.K.A. part-time employees. This QAB revolutionizes the way IRS document examiners will look at 401k plan eligibility clauses and warns that inadequately drafted provisions dealing with part-time employees may be disqualifying, regardless of any plan determination letter.



Why the Attack?


As 401(k) plans have matured, newly recruited employees are no longer willing to wait the traditional 1000 hour, one-year eligibility period to begin participating. Many employers are liberating their traditional 401k plans of a 1000 hr year wait by allowing immediate eligibility, at least for the deferral portion of the plan.



Other employers, while permitting immediate eligibility, wish to also avoid covering part-time employees because of :
(1) the negative effect on the ADP test as part-timers seldom contribute and will be counted as a zero.
(2) the administrative costs of adding and deleting new employees and
(3) the part-timers zero balance will prescribe a top heavy contribution.
Employers are now looking to provide immediate deferral entry and simultaneously exclude part-timers as a classification



The Problem:

Treas. Reg. 1.410(a)-3 notes that a service condition requiring more than one thousand hour year of service is invalid. In other words, what matters is that a plan as written, could have a service requirement in excess of the Code 410(a) limits, which is enough to disqualify the plan. Therefore, as a class part-timers can not be excluded.

IRS additionally addressed this issue in the following:
A 1994 Field Directive instructed IRS examiners to challenge plans which had these service requirements.
the IRS modified Publication 794, which accompanies determination letters, added the following :

determination letter may not be relied on with respect to whether a plan's exclusion classifications, if any, violate the minimum age or service requirements of section 410 by indirectly imposing an impermissible age or service requirement.

A 2002 Recurring Issue Focus (RIF) told IRS examiners that this would be an audit issue, not a determination letter matter.



IRS 401k Attack

Effective with the February 14, 2006 QAB the IRS examiners will again challenge 401k plans with the part-time exclusions. Examiners will not be challenging an exclusion classification that is defined without reference to hours of service (e.g., hourly paid employees). The QAB states:

Specialists should take note that the issue of whether a plan is providing a direct or indirect service requirement is not limited to part-time or seasonal employees. Any exclusion classification, whether it be part-time, seasonal, temporary, or any other classification of employees, should be closely scrutinized. Specialists should require that any such classification be clearly defined.


Employer's 401k Triumph

Plan sponsors should carefully examine their 401k plans if they currently exclude part-time employees from participation. If the plan does not have a fail-safe to assure that the plan will comply with Code 410(a), the sponsor should consider amending the plan.
The employer could regain the provision by including fail-safe language for the condition where the employee works more than 1,000 hours of service during a plan year. The plan can exclude part-time employees as a classification until they meet the year of service requirement, even though full-time employees enter immediately.



Want to retire with $1,127,376.04? With more than two decades of operational and management experience Lawrence Groves has developed a sharp eye for how businesses get clobbered with retirement plan fees and how they can retool for a sleeker, smoother, strategically focused retirement plan. As an entrepreneur who quickly built his own successful consulting business he also empathetically helps other business owners set priorities and create the retirement programs that get results. Visit http://www.www.solo-k.com or http://www.womensolok.comContact Lawrence at Lawrence@solo-kor call 727-277-4137

Post new Comment



This site does not allow anonymous comments. Registered members can login to participate. Registration is free and takes only a few seconds



 

Site Search

Search for in
Please support our sponsors *

Retirement Planning Made Simple -
Map out your future!


Experience the difference unbiased money management can offer you.....

Recent forum posts:

Solo 401-k

3%?

Hello from the SF area

Puerto Vallarta & Lake Tahoe--The Best of Both Worlds

Looking for the Best Place in the World to Retire?

How Do You Get to Paradise?

What’s Going on South of the Border?

Want to Find Treasure in the Sierra Madres?

fixed index annuities as funding vehicle for solo 401-k

Need advice

About this site
Powered by Esselbach Storyteller CMS System Version 1.8