Benefits: participant contribution timing needs scrutiny.One of the hot topics at the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA EBSA Employee Benefits Security Administration (US DOL; formerly Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration) EBSA European Biophysical Societies' Association EBSA European BioSafety Association EBSA European Biological Safety Association ) of the Department of Labor is the timely remittance of participant contributions. Regardless of materiality MATERIALITY. That which is important; that which is not merely of form but of substance. 2. When a bill for discovery has been filed, for example, the defendant must answer every material fact which is charged in the bill, and the test in these cases seems to , failure to remit or untimely remittance of participant contributions is a prohibited transaction under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C.A. § 1001 et seq. (1974), is a federal law that sets minimum standards for most voluntarily established Pension and health plans in private industry to provide protection for individuals enrolled in these plans. (ERISA See Employee Retirement Income Security Act. ERISA See Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). ), notes Linda S. Cummings, director of quality control at accounting firm J.H. Cohn LLP LLP - Lower Layer Protocol . This is considered to be an extension of credit--unlawful financing, or the use of plan assets for the benefit of the employer. Determining exactly when the contributions are considered to be late is not always a simple matter, however, Cummings notes. Participant contributions are considered to be plan assets as soon as they can be reasonably segregated from the employer's general assets, but not later than the 15th day of the month following the month in which the contributions are withheld. However, she says, plan sponsors must be aware that the 15th day of the following month is not a safe harbor Safe Harbor 1. A legal provision to reduce or eliminate liability as long as good faith is demonstrated. 2. A form of shark repellent implemented by a target company acquiring a business that is so poorly regulated that the target itself is less attractive. , especially if the assets can be "reasonably segregated" earlier. EBSA has been pursuing an aggressive enforcement project by investigating the timing of employer payments into benefit plans and vigorously pursuing recoveries of diverted contributions and earnings, Cummings says. In addition, plan fiduciaries may be subject to other monetary penalties. The law is clear: When a company sponsors a plan to benefit employees, it cannot use the plan assets for business purposes. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||

Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion