faces
                     ...from the HR Perspective
New MFYCO
Human Resource Update

June 2014



 Important Decisions   

 

 

 

The Supreme Court has issued three important decisions during the last few days. Each of these has an impact on companies, non-profits and governments. Let's start with the one that may have the most far reaching effect.

 

Down But Not Out?

 

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the Senate was not in recess at the time President Obama made appointments to the National Labor Relations Board. This may have a dramatic effect on the NLRB cases decided during their tenure as three of the five members were appointed by the President during that period effectively negating a quorum.

 

Many had rightly feared that these appointments would change the Board from a somewhat neutral body to one that would proactively act against companies and in favor of organized labor and other special interest groups. Two of the appointees were solidly in organized labor's camp.

 

Sharon Block was labor counsel for the late Senator Ted Kennedy from Massachusetts who was one of the unions' most active advocates. Richard Griffin was the International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) chief counsel. Their votes have favored unions in nearly every case, one of which forced employees into unions without their consent (more on this issue follows.)

 

During the period of time in question, the Board decided most of the 436 cases in favor of the unions and issued promulgations of its own such as the delayed bulletin board notice that workers have the right to unionize.

 

While the appointment rift was somewhat settled during the summer of last year, and all current NLRB members have Senate approval, the Board is still unabashedly pro-labor with two of the replacement appointees having union linked backgrounds. Nancy Schiffer was Associate General Counsel to the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), and Kent Hirozawa who was chief counsel to National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Chairman Mark Pearce. Mark Pearce, a continuing member and Chairman, was a founding partner of the Buffalo, New York, law firm of Creighton, Pearce, Johnsen & Giroux, whose practice is dedicated to representing unions' and plaintiffs' actions against companies.

 

It now appears that these cases and regulations may be invalid and will have to be re-decided. The Board has just stated that it will act as expeditiously as possible to resolve these cases. As this is being written, what this means exactly is uncertain. It could mean that the Board will perfunctorily rubber stamp each case. Business groups are preparing arguments that the cases will have to be reheard. It appears that another round of court cases challenging the manner in which the decisions will be made or remade is in the not too distant future.

 

A note to your Congressional members would seem to be prudent. Stating your concern that the now nullified cases and regulations should, respectively, be reheard and reconsidered rather than rubber-stamped would be of benefit to all companies and ultimately their employees. You can contact your Representatives here: 

 

Automatic Unionization for Home Healthcare Workers Overturned

 

The Supreme Court, in a narrow decision, stated that the State of Illinois exceeded its authority by forcing non-union home health-care workers to become union members. The governor had signed a bill that permitted Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Healthcare Illinois-Indiana, the union that represents publicly employed home care workers, to automatically deduct membership dues from employees' paychecks under the collective bargaining agreement it has with the state - even though the workers did not want to join the union.

 

While the decision appears to apply only to the instant case, Union leaders fear that conservative judges across the country will use the ruling in this case to strike down laws in 26 states that currently require public-sector employees, including but not limited to administrative staff, highway workers, teachers and police officers, to pay dues to the unions that negotiate contracts on their behalf even if the employee doesn't want to become a union member.

 

Hobby Lobby Wins

 

In another close decision, the Supreme Court decided that Obamacare cannot be used to require for-profit, closely held companies to provide certain birth control drugs and devices - such as morning after pills - that could cause abortion.

 

Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties had argued that these forms of birth control violated the owners' religious beliefs. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) argued that, as these organizations were corporations, The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) did not apply. The Court ruled otherwise essentially stating that the close ownership of the corporations meant that they were the owners' alternate identity. The Court also stated that this decision concerns only the contraceptive mandate and should not be understood to hold that all insurance-coverage mandates, e.g. for vaccinations or blood transfusions, must necessarily fall if they conflict with an employer's religious beliefs. Nor does the decision provide a shield for employers who might cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice.

 

This has been a busy time for the Supreme Court as it addresses issues that affect our organizations. Please let us know if we may be of assistance in any of these matters.

 

I hope that you and your family have a wonderful summer!


Sincerely,
  

  

  

  

 

 

Michael F. Yates,

President 

 

If you find value in this newsletter please let us know. Feel free to call me with a comment and/or ask a question at any time (908-689-4200) or send me an email (myates@mfyco.com). We offer this timely information as another benefit of your relationship with our company. If you feel a friend or colleague would benefit from receiving our newsletter, please feel free to forward a copy. 


You can view all of our newsletters by clicking the 'newsletter archives' link at our company website www.mfyco.com.

 

In This Issue
Penalty Relief Pilot for Small Retirement Plans Begins in June
MFYCO Facebook
Mid-Year Plan Amendments Related to Marriages of Same-Sex Couples
Retirement Plan Payments for Accident, Health and Disability Insurance
So Under FMLA, You Don't Have 50 Employees, Think Again!
IRS Information Reporting Requirements under the Affordable Care Act
eLaws Quick Link
Retirement Plan Limits
Track Government Spending
Terms of Use

 

Penalty Relief Pilot for Small Retirement Plans Begins in June

 

The Internal Revenue Service will begin a one-year pilot program in June to help small businesses with retirement plans that owe penalties for not filing reporting documents. By filing current and prior year forms during this pilot program, they can avoid penalties.

 

The IRS is reaching out to certain small businesses that maintain retirement plans and may have been unaware that they had a filing requirement. The IRS projects that this program will bring a significant number of small business owners into compliance with the reporting requirements.

 

Plan administrators and sponsors who do not file an annual Form 5500 series return can face stiff penalties - up to $15,000 per return. Those who have already been assessed a penalty for late filings are not eligible for this program. This program is open only to retirement plans generally maintained by certain small businesses, such as those in an owner-spouse arrangement or eligible partnership.

 

Multiple late retirement plan returns may be included in a single submission. If a retirement plan has delinquent returns for more than one plan year, penalty relief may be available for all of these returns. Similarly, delinquent returns for more than one plan may be included in a single penalty relief request. No filing fee will be charged during the pilot program.  

 

More information on how to participate in the program can be found in IRS  Revenue Procedure 2014-32.

 

 
Invitation to MFYCO Facebook
facebook 

 

Mid-Year Plan Amendments Related to Marriages of Same-Sex Couples

 

Safe harbor 401(k) or 401(m) plans may be amended mid-year to comply with the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Windsor and related IRS guidance in Revenue Ruling 2013-17 and Notice 2014-19 (Notice 2014-37). The Windsor decision invalidated Section 3 of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which barred married same-sex couples from being treated as married under federal law.

When plan amendments are required

A plan with terms that are inconsistent with Windsor or Revenue Ruling 2013-17 must be amended to comply (Notice 2014-19). For example, a plan must be amended if it defines "spouse" by reference to section 3 of DOMA, or only as a person of the opposite sex. Similarly, a plan must also be amended if a plan sponsor chooses to reflect the outcome of Windsor for periods prior to the date Windsor was decided. Required amendments must generally be adopted by the later of December 31, 2014, or the applicable date under the IRS' general amendment guidance for qualified retirement plans, Revenue Procedure 2007-44 (Q&A-8 of Notice 2014-19).

Safe harbor plan rules

A safe harbor 401(k) or 401(m) plan must generally be adopted at the beginning of a plan year and maintained throughout the full 12-month year. Plan amendments to reflect Windsor and related IRS guidance are exceptions to this general rule.

Page Last Reviewed or Updated by IRS: 19-May-2014

 


We invite you to share our newsletter. 
(It's a lot to think about!) 
 
 

 

Retirement Plan Payments for Accident, Health and Disability Insurance

IRS final regulations (T.D. 9665) state that payments from a qualified defined contribution plan to pay a participant's:

  • accident and health insurance premiums are taxable distributions to the participant unless a statutory exception applies (IRC §§72 and 402(a)), and
  • disability insurance premiums are not taxable distributions if they meet certain conditions.

The regulations finalize the 2007 proposed regulations and add the exception for disability insurance coverage; they are effective January 1, 2015, but may be applied earlier.

Accident and health insurance

The 2007 proposed regulations stated the general rule that payments from a qualified plan to pay a participant's accident or health insurance premiums are taxable distributions unless they're paid:

  • from a qualified retiree health account (IRC §401(h)), or
  • for qualified public safety officers (IRC §402(l)).

Disability insurance

The final regulations include an exception for disability insurance premiums being taxed to participants if the following conditions are met:

  1. Premiums for the disability insurance contract are paid directly from the plan.
  2. The plan receives the benefit payments as required by the disability insurance contract.
  3. Benefit payments under the contract are paid because of an employee's inability to continue employment with the employer because of disability.
  4. The benefit payments to a participant's account aren't more than a reasonable expectation of what the participant would've received as an annual contribution during the disability period, reduced by any other contributions.

If these conditions are satisfied, the disability insurance is considered a plan investment, and the plan's premium payments and the insurance's benefit payments to the plan aren't taxable to the participant.

If the disability insurance premiums are not paid by the plan, the insurance benefits paid to the plan aren't a return on a plan investment. Instead, these payments are contributions to the plan governed by qualified plan contribution rules (generally, IRC §415(c), which limits employer contributions to a defined contribution plan.)

If an employer self-insures this disability coverage (or doesn't finance it through third party insurance), the amount paid to the plan because of the employee's disability is also considered a contribution to the plan governed by the general qualified plan contribution rules.

The final regulations add the exception for nontaxability of disability insurance based on comments IRS received on the 2007 proposed regulations, which:

  • recommended that disability insurance designed to protect against the loss of plan contributions during a period of disability should be excluded from the general taxable distribution rule, and
  • noted that the participant would be taxed on these insurance benefits when they are distributed from the plan.

Page Last Reviewed or Updated by IRS: 12-May-2014  

 

 

Call: 908-689-4200 to contact a
MFYCO professional consulting associate.
happypeople
    

So Under FMLA, You Don't Have 50 Employees, Think Again!

 

FMLA applies to employers who have employed at least 50 employees during each working day for 20 or more calendar weeks during the current or previous calendar year. Since the 20 calendar weeks do not have to be consecutive you must check each workweek of the year to determine if you employed 50 or more employees each working day for 20 weeks.  

 

Who to Count

  • Employees who are employed within any State of the United States, the District of Columbia or any Territory or possession of the United States are counted those outside these areas are not counted for purposes of determining employer coverage or employee eligibility.
  • Employees who are on paid or unpaid leave, including FMLA leave, leave of absence, disciplinary suspension, etc. are counted as long as there is a reasonable expectation that the employee will be returning to active employment. If there is no employer/employee relationship such as in a layoff then such individuals would not be counted.
  • Employees who start work after the first day of the workweek or who terminate employment before the last working day of a calendar week, are not considered employed on each working day of that calendar week.
  • If a private employer maintains 50 or more employees on the payroll during 20 or more calendar (consecutive or nonconsecutive) workweeks in either the current or previous calendar year the employer is covered.
  • Employees who are jointly employed by two employers (Joint Employer Test) must be counted by both employers, whether or not they are maintained on one of the employers' payrolls, in determining employer coverage. For example, an employer that jointly employs 15 temporary workers from an agency and 40 employees is covered by the FMLA.
  • Separate entities will be considered to be parts of a single employer for purposes of the FMLA if they meet the Integrated Employer Test. If this test is met, the employees of all entities making up the integrated employer will be counted in determining employer coverage.

Once you meet the threshold (50 employees for 20 workweeks), you remain covered until you reach a future point where you no longer have 50 employees for 20 nonconsecutive workweeks in the current and previous calendar year.  

 

Example:

 

An employer met the threshold in the calendar year as of September 2, 2008, and dropped below 50 employees before the end of 2008 and continued to employ fewer than 50 employees in all workweeks throughout calendar year 2009, the employer would continue to be covered throughout calendar year 2009 because it met the coverage criteria for 20 workweeks of the previous (i.e., 2008) calendar year.

 

Note, public agencies, including most federal, state and municipalities and public and private elementary and secondary schools are covered regardless of the number of employees.

 

 



 What would you like to see in a future issue?

Contact our office with your suggestions.

  email: info@mfyco.com
 

 

 

IRS Information Reporting Requirements under the Affordable Care Act   

takes effect in 2015

 

The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the IRS released final rules implementing the information reporting provisions, under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) for employers who have 50 or more employees (commonly referred to as an applicable large employer or ALE). The new annual reporting requirements are to inform the IRS about who has access to minimum essential coverage (MEC) and when an employer shared responsibility assessment is owed. (Employers with fewer than 50 full-time employees are exempt from the ACA employer shared responsibility provisions and therefore are not subject to the employer reporting requirements.)

 

IRC §6055 will enforce minimum essential coverage for the individual mandate. IRC §6056 will enforce employer shared responsibility requirements around the employer mandate. Both filings will be due to the IRS no later than February 28th of each year (or March 31st of each year, if filed electronically), reflecting information for the previous calendar year. The first filing year is 2016 for the calendar year of 2015. To date, the IRS has not yet finalized the form number for this filing.

 

Single, Combined Form for Information Reporting

 

Employers that are subject to the employer responsibility provisions and "self-insure" will need to file a single, consolidated form that is divided into two sections, the top half includes information needed for §6056 and the bottom half includes the information needed for §6055. Both portions will need to be completed for information reporting.

 

Employers subject to employer responsibility but do not "self-insure" will complete only the top half of the combined form (§6056). Insurers and other providers of health coverage will report only under §6055, using a separate form for that purpose. Insurers do not have to report those enrolled in the Health Insurance Marketplace since the Marketplace is required to supply data on individuals' covered there.

 

Simplified Option for Employer Reporting "Qualifying Offer"

 

Employers that provide a qualifying offer that is, an offer of minimum value coverage that provides employee-only coverage at a cost to the employee of no more than about $1,100 in 2015 (9.5% of the federal poverty level), combined with an offer of coverage for the employee's family, to any of their full-time employees, the final rules provide a simplified alternative to reporting monthly, employee-specific information on those employees.

  • For employees who receive qualifying offers for all 12 months of the year, employers will need to report only the Name, addresses and taxpayer identification number (TINs) of those employees and the fact that they received a full-year qualifying offer.

Also, employers will be required to supply to their individual employees a copy of that simplified report or a standard statement indicating that the employee received a full-year qualifying offer. The statement must be supplied by January 31 of each year based on prior calendar plan year information. The statements may be provided electronically.

  • For employees who receive a qualifying offer of less than 12 months of the year, employers will simplify reporting to the IRS and to employees for each of these months by entering a code indicating that the qualifying offer was made.
Streamlined Reporting Method

Employers certifying that they have made a qualifying offer to at least 95% of their full-time employees (plus an offer to their families) may use the streamlined reporting method for their entire workforce, including for any employees who do not receive a qualifying offer for the full year. Those employers will provide employees with standard statements relating to their possible eligibility for premium tax credits.

 

Employers will also have the option to avoid identifying in the report which of its employees are full-time, and instead just include in the report those employees who may be full-time. To take advantage of this option, the employer must certify that it offered affordable, minimum value coverage to at least 98 percent of the employees on whom it is reporting.

 

Types of Required Information  

 

Section 6056:

  • Name, address, and employer identification number (EIN) of the ALE;
  • Name and telephone number of a contact for ALE;
  • Calendar Year for which the report is filed (reports are based on calendar year not plan year);
  • Reporting on a calendar month basis the following:
    • Certification as to whether the ALE's full-time employees and their dependents, including spouses, are given an opportunity to enroll in MEC,
    • The number of fulltime employees employed by ALE,
    • The months for which MEC was offered, and
    • The employee's share of the monthly premium for single health coverage that meets minimum value; and
    • The name, address and TIN number for each full-time employee offered coverage.

Section 6055:

  • Name, address, and EIN for the person required to file the return;
  • Name, address, and TIN, or date of birth of each individual covered under the policy or program; and
  • For each covered individual, the months for which the individual was enrolled in coverage and entitled to receive benefits.

In addition, information returns reporting MEC provided to an individual under an insured group health plan must report:

  • Name, address, and EIN of the employer sponsoring the plan; and
  • Whether the coverage is a qualified health plan enrolled in through the Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) and the SHOP's unique identifier. 
 

 


 
 

 

2014 Retirement Plan Limits  

(All limits are based on the calendar year. )

 

 

2014

2013

2012 

Maximum Annual Defined Benefit

$210,000

$205,000

$200,000 

Maximum DC Annual Addition ($$)

$52,000

$51,000

$50,000 

Maximum 401(k) Deferrals

$17,500

$17,500

$17,000 

Older EE Catch-Up Contribution

$5,500

$5,500

$5,500 

Maximum Plan Compensation

$260,000

$255,000

$250,000 

Highly Compensated Threshold

$115,000

$115,000

$115,000 

Key Employee in a Top-Heavy Plan

$170,000

$165,000

$165,000 

SSA Social Security Wage Base

$117,000

$113,700

$110,100

PBGC Maximum Monthly Guarantee*

$4,943.33

$4,789.77

$4,653.41

PBGC Maximum Annual Guarantee*

$59,320

$57,477.24

$55,840.92

Maximum DC Annual Addition (%)

100%

100%

100%

Social Security Tax - Employee

Social Security Tax - Employer

6.2%

6.2%

6.2%

6.2%

4.2%

6.2%

Medicare Tax

1.45%

1.45%

1.45%

DC Plan Deduction Limit

25%

25%

25%

Definition of Compensation for DC

Plan Deduction Limit

Includes Deferrals

*Life Annuity at age 65  

 

If you have not received our business card with these numbers printed on it and would like one, please let us know! We would be happy to mail you one (or a few to share!)


 
about MFYCO ...

  • Michael F. Yates & Company, Inc. can help you with a variety of services ranging from retirement plans to providing results-oriented survey instruments, training and development programs for your employees. Our products and services are intended to help you maximize the effectiveness of your Human Resources function.
     
  • These products and services incorporate our years of experience so that you receive rapid results and exceptional value. From onsite consulting, to strategic business integration, to Web enablement, we understand how Human Resources can be applied to solve your problems and achieve your goals. As a result, we can help you get the most out of your investment and turn your most precious resource into a competitive advantage.
     
  • We offer Consulting, Retirement Planning, Pension and 401(K) both qualified and non qualified Plans, Welfare Plans, Communications, Computer Systems, Executive Plans, Compensation, Mergers, Acquisitions, Divestitures and Other Services. 
     
    We offer a true and honest, Client Partnership.
     

Take the Michael F. Yates & Company, Inc. challenge!

Call us today ... 908-689-4200 



mh group
 How to Track Government Recovery Spending

 

"The Board shall establish and maintain...a user-friendly, public-facing website to foster greater accountability and transparency in the use of covered funds. The website...shall be a portal or gateway to key information relating to the Act and provide connections to other government websites with related information." 

 
 
Michael F. Yates & Company, Inc.
_________________

 
101 Belvidere Avenue
P.O.Box 7
Washington, NJ 07882-0007 
 
908-689-4200

fax: 908-689-6300
 
email: info@mfyco.com


 

 
Our staff and firm are proud
members
of the following professional organizations:

Society of Actuaries
 
American Society of Pension Professionals & Actuaries

Society for Human Resource Management
  
GAPS (Global Association Pension Services)

WorldatWork

 American Management Association

 

National Federation of Independent Business

Better Business Bureau

 

 

 
Terms of Use 
COP
 

 

 

The site ("from the HR perspective" hence herein referred to as MFYCO.com) is made available by Michael F. Yates & Company Incorporated. All content, information and software provided on and through 'from the HR perspective' and MFYCO.com ("Content") may be used solely under the following terms and conditions ("Terms of Use".) 
 
YOUR USE OF THIS WEBSITE CONSTITUTES YOUR AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND BY THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THESE TERMS, YOU SHOULD IMMEDIATELY DISCONTINUE YOUR USE OF THIS SITE.  
 
 
Mike's Best Friend 
 
"Human Resources  provides the leadership, supportive services, guiding principles, policies, structures and standards needed for a quality organization to survive in today's business environment."
 
 MFYCO PRIVACY POLICY

 
Michael F. Yates & Company, Inc. 
believes strongly in protecting the privacy of its users.


Join Our Mailing List

 

Concluding Note

As always, any statements regarding federal tax law contained herein are not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purposes of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law or to market any entity, investment plan or arrangement.