Sample Subrogation and Reimbursement Clauses for Summary Plan Description Now Available
(Posted on May 25, 2018 by Carol V. Calhoun)

A new article by Carol V. Calhoun, published by Lexis Practice Advisor, provides sample subrogation and reimbursement clauses to be used in a summary plan description. Such clauses are typically used in an instance in which an employer’s health or disability plan wants to avoid a situation in which a participant gets a double recovery for the same illness or injury. For example, an employee covered by both the employer’s health plan and a spouse’s health plan should not have the same medical expenses paid by both plans. Or an individual who is hit by a car, and recovers lost wages from the driver’s insurance company, should not also be able to receive disability benefits for the same period.

You can see a copy of the piece at this link.

Carol V. Calhoun quoted in “Will the Nick Sabin tax apply to Nick Sabin?”
(Posted on March 26, 2018 by Carol V. Calhoun)

Carol V. Calhoun was quoted in a March 12, 2018 article in Tax Notes, dealing with the issue of whether the new excise taxes on excess compensation and excess severance benefits will apply to public colleges and universities. The wording of the law makes it unclear whether the law should apply to the very governmental entities most likely to have employees that would otherwise be affected by it.

Read the article.

“Effect of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 on Nonprofits and Governments,” PowerPoint now available
(Posted on February 15, 2018 by Carol V. Calhoun)

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 made a number of changes affecting the compensation and benefits that governmental, church, and other tax-exempt organizations can provide to their employees. Given the short time between introduction and passage of the Act, it is not surprising that many of the new provisions are unclear in their application. Moreover, some of them may produce unintended consequences for these organizations.

As part of a symposium on “Recent Developments in Benefits/Executive Compensation Affecting Tax Exempt Organizations,” Carol V. Calhoun gave a presentation on the ways in which the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 will affect the compensation and benefits of such organizations. A copy of the PowerPoint for her speech can be found at this link.

Recent Developments in Benefits/Executive Compensation Affecting Tax Exempt Organizations
(Posted on February 15, 2018 by Carol V. Calhoun)

The PowerPoint slides for the portion of the presentation dealing with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 are below.

Download document [587.15 KB]

Nonprofits and Governments Face Compensation and Benefits Issues under the New Tax Law
(Posted on January 11, 2018 by Carol V. Calhoun)

The recently passed tax bill imposes a 21% excise tax on excess compensation and excess severance benefits of certain executives of nonprofit and governmental employers. The provision has a substantial impact on the compensation and benefits that such organizations can provide for their executives. Moreover, the determination of which employers, and which executives, are covered includes several traps for the unwary.

IRS Issues Self-Assessment Forms for Federal, State, and Local Government Employers
(Posted on July 10, 2017 by Carol V. Calhoun)

The IRS has now issued a series of forms to enable federal, state, and local governments to assess their compliance with federal tax statutes, and has set forth some common errors found in examining such employers. Several of the forms relate to employee benefits issues, and may be of assistance to governments trying to ensure that they comply with all legal requirements.

The forms are as follows:

For use by Federal, State and Local Government Entities

For use by State and Local Government Entities Only

Employers Need to Adopt Pre-Approved 403(b) Plans by March 31, 2020
(Posted on January 30, 2017 by Carol V. Calhoun)

With the IRS no longer issuing rulings or determination letters on individually designed qualified plans or § 403(b) plans under most circumstances, the importance of pre-approved plans (master, prototype, and volume submitter plans) has been vastly increased. Adoption of a pre-approved plan is now the sole method for an employer to have assurance that its plan meets IRS requirements. While § 403(b) plans cannot take the form of master plans, they can be structured as prototype or volume submitter plans.

Reflecting this, Revenue Procedure 2013-22 established a program for issuing opinion and advisory letters for § 403(b) pre-approved plans. Starting June 28, 2013, sponsors of plans intended to qualify as pre-approved § 403(b) plans were permitted to apply for such letters. The first letters have not been issued under that program yet, but the expectation is that they will be issued soon.

The IRS has now announced in Rev. Proc. 2017-18, 2017-5 I.R.B. 743, that the last day of the remedial amendment period for employers to adopt pre-approved § 403(b) plans will be March 31, 2020. After that date, adoption of a pre-approved § 403(b) plan will no longer give an employer retroactive relief for qualification defects which arose since 2010. Revenue Ruling 2013-22 indicated that a six-year cycle would apply to pre-approved § 403(b) plans. While it is not clear whether the second cycle would also end on exactly March 31, there will likely not be another opportunity to adopt a pre-approved plan to fix past errors until about 2025 or 2026. And even then, adoption of a pre-approved plan would likely not provide retroactive relief for periods before 2020.

Obtaining an IRS advisory or opinion letter is not legally required, so long as a plan (in form and operation) complies with § 403(b). However, as a practical matter, an employer will typically want to adopt a pre-approved § 403(b) plan with an IRS letter verifying its status, since one of the major advantages of a pre-approved plan is the opportunity to get IRS blessing on the plan.

Checklist of Federal Tax Law Rules Applicable to Public Retirement Systems
(Posted on October 8, 2016 by Carol V. Calhoun)

Note: This outline is a basic summary of the principal Internal Revenue Code qualification requirements that apply to governmental plans, other than plans described in Code section 403(b) or 457(b). It also includes selected Code requirements that do not relate to qualification. It is very general in nature, and does not replace research on specific questions. Read more.

Proposed Regulations: Normal Retirement Age for Governmental Plans
(Posted on January 27, 2016 by Carol V. Calhoun)

On January 27, 2016, the IRS issued proposed regulations governing the extent to which governmental pension plans must comply with the rules governing normal retirement ages. In general, the rules are a positive step from the perspective of governmental plan sponsors, but they contain a few potential pitfalls.

Background

The qualification rules of the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”) provide for several rules that are based on a plan’s normal retirement age. For example, a pension plan cannot pay in-service benefits before the earlier of age 62 or normal retirement age. Benefits must be fully vested at normal retirement age. Benefits under the plan must be definitely determinable (i.e., subject to calculation, rather than at an employer’s discretion) as of normal retirement age. Read more.

Economically Targeted Investments: Department of Labor Guidance Leaves Many Questions Open
(Posted on December 7, 2015 by Carol V. Calhoun)

On October 22, 2015, the Department of Labor issued new guidance, Interpretive Bulletin 2015-01, relating to the fiduciary standards under ERISA in considering economically targeted investments (“ETIs”), or investments chosen to foster specific social goals, such as economic development and/or home ownership in a particular state or area. What does this guidance mean for fund fiduciaries?