Enmgy E-00059-15-o Series1 Ethics - 1 Cpe Hour For A Score Of At Least 70%

IRS regulations under 411(d)(6) do provide a caveat to exclude hardship distributions from being treated as protected benefits. This means that a plan can be amended to eliminate hardship distribution provisions without violating the regulations. Therefore, the statement is true.

The explanation for the given correct answer is that according to Rev Proc 2005-66, certain plan features can be added during a plan year as long as a formal amendment is adopted by the employer before the last day of the plan year. This means that the employer has the flexibility to make changes to the plan during the year without having to wait until the next plan year to implement them. Therefore, the statement is true.

Rev. Proc. 2005-66 is a revenue procedure issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that provides guidance on various aspects of retirement plans. It has been interpreted to mean that testing elections, specifically the top-paid group election for determining highly compensated employees (HCEs) and the Current Year vs. Prior Year testing methods for the Actual Deferral Percentage (ADP) and Actual Contribution Percentage (ACP) tests, cannot be amended after the last day of the Plan Year. Therefore, the statement "Rev. Proc. 2005-66 has been interpreted to mean that testing elections cannot be amended after the last day of the Plan Year as far as the top-paid group election for the HCE determination or the Current Year vs. Prior Year testing methods for the ADP and ACP Testing" is true.

The statement suggests that the IRS prohibition on mid-year amendments to a Safe Harbor 401(k) Plan is still a concern. However, there is some optimism that Congressional action might bring about a change in this matter. Therefore, the answer "True" indicates that the statement is correct and there is hope for a potential alteration in the IRS prohibition.

IRS Notice 2014-74 made small changes to the safe harbor 402(f) tax/rollover notices, which became effective on January 1, 2015. This means that the statement is correct, as the notice did indeed provide updates to the content of the notices.

The IRC 412(d)(2) amendment rule allows defined benefit pension plan sponsors to make retroactive amendments within 2-1/2 months after each plan year. This rule does not apply to defined contribution plan sponsors, so they cannot make retroactive amendments within this timeframe. Therefore, the statement that defined contribution plan sponsors cannot make retroactive amendments using this 2-1/2 month timing parameter is true.

Retroactive amendments are typically not allowed for defined contribution plans after the end of a plan year. However, there are a few exceptions to this rule. One of these exceptions is the 11(g) corrective amendment, which is used to correct failures in nondiscrimination testing for sections 410(b) or 401(a)(4) of the plan. Therefore, it is true that 11(g) corrective amendments can be made retroactively for these specific testing failures.

A reformative amendment is a type of amendment that can be made retroactively under EPCRS (Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System). It is used to align the plan document with the actual operations of the plan. However, there are certain parameters for a reformative amendment. It must primarily benefit nonhighly compensated employees, and the amendment must be submitted under either the VCP (Voluntary Correction Program) or the 5300/5307 determination letter application process. Therefore, the statement that the given answer is true is correct.

The guidance released by the IRS states that a 402(f) tax/rollover notice is not required for participants who choose to do an In-Plan rollover. This is because in an In-Plan rollover, the money is not actually distributed from the Plan to the participant. Therefore, the statement is true.