401(k) and 401(m): IRS Issues Final Regulations
PENSION BENEFITS
- Eighth Circuit Reinstates 401(k) Plan Fee Lawsuit Against Wal‑Mart
- IRS Issues 2009 Cumulative List
- Pension Plan Limitations for 2010
- IRS Issues Final Regulations under Code Section 436
- Recent IRS Guidance Addresses Contribution of Unused Paid Time Off, Automatic Enrollment and Tax Notices
- Supreme Court Holds that Pension Plan May Apply a Benefit Formula That Treats Pre-Pregnancy Disability Act Pregnancy Leave Less Favorably Than Other Medical Leave
- IRS Issues Guidance on Suspension of Safe Harbor Nonelective Contributions
- Treasury Department Issues Final Regulations on Automatic Enrollment Plans
- Kennedy v. DuPont: The Supreme Court Makes Life a Little Easier for Plan Administrators
- IRS Issues 2008 Cumulative List
- Pension Plan Limitations for 2009
- Heroes Earning Assistance and Relief Tax Act Adds Benefits for Those in Military Service
- Benefits Quiz
- Supreme Court Rules Defined Contribution Plan Participants Can Sue for Losses to Their Individual Accounts
- IRS Issues Guidance for New Distribution Requirements that Become Effective in 2008
- New Multiemployer Plan Disclosure Requirements — ERISA Section 101(k)
- IRS Issues 2007 Cumulative List
- IRS Proposes Regulations Regarding Automatic Contribution Arrangements
- Final Section 403(b) Regulations: What Plan Sponsors Need to Know
- Pension Plan Limitations for 2008
- IRS Issues Final Regulations Affecting Section 403(b) Plans Covering Employees of Tax-Exempt Organizations, Public Schools and Churches
- Treasury Department Issues Final Regulations under Code Section 415
- IRS Updates Procedures for Opinion, Advisory and Determination Letter Applications
- Contacting Missing Plan Participants — Practical Considerations
- 2007 Final Roth 401(k) Regulations: The Latest Chapter
- Public Safety Employees and the Pension Protection Act of 2006
- DOL Issues Interim Final Rule Relating to the Time and Order of Domestic Relations Orders
- Guidance Issued on Deduction of Contributions to Defined Benefit Plans
- IRS Issues Distribution Guidance in Notice 2007–7
- IRS Issues Transitional Guidance Regarding Divestiture Rights and A Model Notice
- New Notices and Disclosures for Plan Sponsors under the PPA
- Cash Balance Plans — A Clearer Future?
- Pension Plan Limitations for 2007
- IRS Finalizes Anti-Cutback
Regulations: Heinz and Utilization Test Included - Internal Revenue Service Updates and Expands the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System
- The Internal Revenue Service Issues a Second Set of Final Regulations Regarding the Disclosure of Relative Values of Optional Forms of Benefit
- The Book on the Roth 401(k) and 403(b) and Why Your Business or Organization Must Have One (maybe)
- The Internal Revenue Service Releases 2005 Cumulative List of Changes
- Two Recent Court Decisions Remind Plans to Exercise Caution in Handling Contested Benefit Claims
- Pension Plan Limitations for 2006
- Relative Value Information Required to Be Included in Certain QJSA Explanations As Early As November 3, 2005
- Treasury Department Issues Proposed Section 415 Regulations
- IRS Issues Proposed Roth 401(k) Regulations
- Revenue Procedure 2005–23 — Internal Revenue Service Guidance for Implementing Heinz Decision
- Use of an Administrative Committee to Address Fiduciary Obligations of a Retirement Plan Sponsor
- Proposed and Temporary Section 403(b) Regulations of Interest to Tax-Exempt Employers
- Missing Participants
- The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004: Employee Benefits Related Issues
- The Automatic Rollover of Mandatory Cash-Outs: The Department of Labor's Safe Harbor Final Regulations
- Pension Plan Limitations for 2005
- IRS Issues Final 401(a)(9) Minimum Distribution Regulations
- Unanimous Supreme Court Decision Determines That Post-Retirement Plan Amendment Violates ERISA's Anti-Cutback Rule
- PBGC Announces New Participant Notice Voluntary Correction Program
- DOL Addresses Modifications Made to Pre-Existing QDROs
- Revenue Procedure 200425 Extends Remedial Amendment Period Only for Certain Specified Disqualifying Provisions
- New Requirement for Automatic Rollovers of Small Cash-Outs from Qualified Plans: The Proposed Regulations
- IRS Issues Updated Procedures for Waiver of Minimum Funding Standards
- IRS Issues Guidance Clarifying Allocation of Plan Expenses to Inactive Participants
- New Legislation Clarifies Rule on Plan Loans to Servicemembers
- Proposed 401(k) Regulations Include Interesting ESOP Change
- Pension Plan Limitations for 2004
- Recent Court Cases on Cash Balance Plans
- Internal Revenue Service Simplifies and Streamlines the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System
On December 29, 2004, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued long awaited final regulations governing cash or deferred arrangements (CODAs) under Code section 401(k) and matching contributions under Code section 401(m) that consolidate and simplify previous guidance, as well as reflect substantial legislative changes. This article will highlight significant provisions of the final regulations.
Background The final regulations incorporate statutory changes and other IRS guidance issued since 1991. Included are statutory changes made by the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996, the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 and the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001.
On July 17, 2003, the IRS proposed regulations that addressed numerous CODA plan issues, including nondiscrimination requirements, matching and employee contribution requirements and SIMPLE 401(k) plans. The proposed regulations were the first set of comprehensive regulations on CODAs since the last set of final regulations were published in 1991 and amended in 1994. The new final regulations follow the proposed regulations, with a few exceptions.
Effective Date
The final regulations are generally effective for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2006. However, plan sponsors are permitted to adopt the regulations for plan years beginning on or after December 30, 2004, provided that the plan sponsor applies all the rules of the final regulations.
Nondiscrimination Testing Method The final regulations also provide that changes in testing elections or procedures used primarily to manipulate testing results will cause a plan to fail nondiscrimination testing. Because such abusive techniques are not defined by the final regulations, plan sponsors may have difficulty determining whether a change will be viewed as abusive. Accordingly, plan sponsors should carefully consider this anti-abuse provision when deciding to make changes to their testing procedures. An example of an abusive technique is provided in the Department of Treasury Memorandum issued October 22, 2004, (prior to the issuance of the final regulations) on the use of short-service employees to impact nondiscrimination testing.
Under existing regulations, plans either test on a current year basis or use a prior year method when performing their annual ADP and ACP nondiscrimination tests. The final regulations provide that a plan does not have to use the same testing method both for deferrals (the ADP test) and for matching and voluntary after-tax contributions (the ACP test). This may be relevant where a plan allows for discretionary matching contributions but chooses not to make any in certain years. Such a plan would use current year testing for the ACP test, but might prefer prior year testing for the ADP test. The final regulations require that whatever testing method is chosen, it must be specified in the plan document. The testing methods may only be changed by amendment, subject to certain restrictions on changing from current year to prior year testing.
Restrictions on Targeted QNECs and QMACs Under the new rules, a plan can count a QNEC greater than 5% of compensation only if the QNEC does not exceed two times the plan's "representative contribution rate." The representative contribution rate measures the rate of QNECs received by all members of a testing group (which consists of either half of all eligible NHCEs or all eligible NHCEs employed on the last day of the plan year). A similar 5% limitation applies to QNECs taken into account in the ACP test. The final regulations increase the 5% limit to 10% for QNECs made in connection with a prevailing wage obligation under a plan subject to the Davis-Bacon Act. Similar rules apply to QMACs, with a few variations.
An employer may correct a failed ADP or ACP nondiscrimination test by making a "qualified nonelective contribution" (QNEC) or "qualified matching contribution" (QMAC). There are a number of methods that an employer may use in allocating QNECs and QMACs to participants. Under the "targeted" QNEC or QMAC method, additional contributions are made to one or more of the NHCEs with the lowest compensation. An employer's use of this "targeted" method can greatly reduce the cost of nondiscrimination compliance. The final regulations have added restrictions that severely limit the use of these methods of compliance.
Calculation of Gap Period Earnings
To correct a failed ADP or ACP nondiscrimination test, plans may make corrective distributions of excess contributions to HCEs. The excess contributions are required to be adjusted for related investment gains or losses. Under prior rules, excess contributions did not have to be adjusted for gains and losses from the end of the plan year until the distribution date (referred to as the "gap period"). The final regulations provide that gap period gains and losses must be included if a plan would credit a participant's account with income between the last day of the plan year and the distribution date if the plan were to distribute the entire account (e.g., a daily valuation plan). Accordingly, a plan that is valued annually (or in some cases quarterly) will not have a valuation date during this period and, thus, an adjustment will not be necessary. For plans subject to the new rule, the final regulations provide that the plan must use a reasonable method in calculating such gain or loss and provide for a 7 day window period. Since it may be extremely difficult to estimate when the distribution will actually be processed, the final regulations also provide a safe harbor earnings calculation method. Under this safe harbor method, 10% of the income for the preceding plan year is multiplied by the number of months in the gap period, including the month of payment if the corrective distribution is made after the 15th of the month. Some practitioners have noted that most daily valued plans will need to use the safe harbor method, since 7 days probably is not sufficient to allow a distribution of calculated amounts. Plan sponsors should note that failure to return such excess contributions and all applicable earnings to HCEs is an operational failure that could jeopardize the plan's qualified status.
Safe Harbor 401(k) Plans Important changes and clarifications to the requirements for safe harbor plans contained in the final regulations are:
The final regulations contain detailed guidance on safe harbor 401(k) plans. Safe harbor 401(k) plans are exempt from ADP and ACP nondiscrimination testing if they satisfy certain requirements. Key requirements for safe harbor 401(k) plans include the following:
Contributions
The final regulations:
Plan Document
The final regulations provide that the plan document must contain the relevant provisions if a plan chooses to avoid ADP and ACP nondiscrimination testing by making safe harbor contributions. The plan cannot state that it will have the option to perform the ADP or ACP test if the contribution or notice requirements of the safe harbor are not met.
Full 12-Month Plan Year
A safe harbor 401(k) plan must generally be adopted before the beginning of the plan year and be maintained throughout a full 12-month plan year. However, the final regulations do permit a safe harbor 401(k) plan to terminate during the plan year and to maintain its safe harbor status (not violate the 12-month rule), provided the termination is on account of a substantial business hardship (as defined in the final regulations) or a merger or acquisition. The plan may terminate for other reasons, provided the employer funds the required contributions to the date of termination and gives an employee notice of the termination, and the plan satisfies the ADP test. The final regulations also contain an exception to the twelve-month plan year requirement for a short plan year caused by a change in plan year (for which the plan will remain a safe harbor plan) that is preceded and followed by a twelve-month plan year (or followed by a short plan year if the plan satisfies the safe harbor requirements for the immediately following twelve months).
Safe Harbor Notice
The use of different mediums to provide the requisite safe harbor notice is also addressed in the final regulations. The required written notice of the employee's rights and obligations under a safe harbor plan can be provided through another medium that the IRS permits as satisfying a written notice requirement for qualified retirement plans. Plan sponsors may rely on IRS Notice 2000–3 regarding the use of electronic media to satisfy the safe harbor written notice requirement.
Hardship Distributions As a result, there are now six "deemed hardship" events. In addition, for hardships pertaining to medical expenses, the definition of dependent has been expanded to include a non-custodial child.
The final regulations clarify the rule that a hardship distribution can be taken only after all available distributions under the qualified plan of the employer, including the distribution of dividends under an ESOP.
Under the hardship safe harbor events, a hardship distribution is deemed to be on account of an immediate and heavy financial need if the distribution is for certain medical expenses, purchase of a home, payment of tuition and related educational fees and prevention of foreclosure or eviction. The final regulations expand this list of safe harbor hardship events to include:
Automatic Enrollments
A CODA may provide for a default deferral election if no affirmative election is made by a participant. The final regulations clarify that there is no limit on the amount of the default election, and that the 3% figure set forth in Revenue Ruling 2000–8 was only for illustrative purposes. However, the final regulations provide that, in order for a plan to retain qualified status, the employee must have an effective opportunity to elect cash instead of deferral. This means that plan sponsors that adopt automatic enrollments must ensure that plan participants are aware of their right to opt out of the CODA. This would entail informing employees of the automatic enrollment provisions prior to the date they are eligible to participate in the plan, and allowing participants to cease the automatic deferrals at any time.
Prefunding of Contributions
The final regulations provide that elective deferral and matching contributions generally cannot be funded prior to the performance of services for which compensation is being deferred or matched. Accordingly, an employer may not prefund contributions to accelerate the deductions as permitted under Notice 2002–48. Plan sponsors also should note that the acceleration of 401(k) plan deductions is on the IRS's list of abusive tax transactions. However, the final regulations allow for the following three limited exceptions if the principal purpose is not the acceleration of tax deductions:
Other Clarifications
The final regulations also clarify the following:
Issues Not Addressed
The final regulations do not address the timing of plan amendments if a plan is changing from current year testing method to prior year testing method (or vice versa). Also not addressed are rules relating to Roth 401(k) deferrals or to post-severance contribution for plan participants. The IRS is expected to issue guidance on these issues at a later date.
Conclusion The IRS has not issued guidance on when plans are to be amended to reflect the changes of the final regulations. We will update you on the timing for plan amendments once guidance is issued.
Please contact our office for more information on the final regulations and how they may impact your plans.
Plan sponsors should review the final regulations now to determine which of the many changes affect their plans. Plan sponsors also should decide whether to apply the final regulations as of the first plan year beginning on or after January 1, 2006 or earlier. If applied earlier, plan sponsors must remember to apply all the provisions of the final regulations. In addition, if the provisions are applied in the middle of a plan year, plan sponsors must ensure that all provisions are observed in operation from the beginning of the plan year.
Copyright © 2006 Trucker Huss. All rights reserved. This article is published as an information source for our clients and colleagues. The article is current as of the date shown above, is general in nature and is not the substitute for legal advice or opinion in a particular case. In response to new IRS rules of practice, we inform you that any federal tax information contained in this writing cannot be used for the purpose of avoiding tax-related penalties or promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters in this writing.

