Compliance September 28, 2005

Bush Storm Relief Bill Includes Plan Distribution, Loan Provisions

September 28, 2005 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - President Bush has signed into law a series of tax breaks for Katrina victims including the loosening of rules for distributions and loans from workplace retirement plans or IRAs.
Reported by

Among the provisions of the  Katrina Emergency Tax Relief Act of 2005affecting the retirement services community are:

  • a waiving of the customary 10% early withdrawal penalty for money taken out of IRAs or company retirement plans with a maximum distribution of $100,000 for qualified hurricane victims.Taxes on the money can be spread over three years. Or, if the money is repaid within three years, the distribution is exempt from federal income tax. The distributions will also be exempt from the 20% withholding tax that normally applies to pre-retirement distributions that are not taken as an annuity or rolled over into another qualified plan.
  • An increase in the customary $50,000 ceiling on hardship loans to $100,000. Previously, loans were limited to the lesser of $50,000 or half of a defined contribution plan vested account balance. A loan repayment scheduled for between August 25, 2005 and December 31, 2006 is delayed for a year while subsequent repayments on the loan will be adjusted for the one-year delay. Interest payments will also be similarly delayed.

The federal tax breaks are reserved for ” qualified individuals” which the law defines as those whose primary home as of August 28, 2005 is in the Hurricane Katrina disaster area and who have sustained an economic loss because of the storm.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

Loan Repayment Worries

A representative of one plan provider said there is concern if cash-strapped storm victims dip into their retirement accounts to take a loan for people who may still be hit with storm-related expenses they aren’t yet aware of or might lose their jobs and won’t be able to repay the money. The unpaid loan is eventually considered a plan distribution and taxed.

“There is a concern that if the employee takes a loan, it’s more probable that they may not be able to pay it off,” said Howard Heller, a senior ERISA compliance analyst at T. Rowe Price.

Heller said it may well be worth it for participants to opt for a distribution because repayments can be made over three years and because of the tax breaks in the recently signed bill for those payments. “We think that’s the better route,” Heller said in a PLANSPONSOR.com interview.

Heller said his company has been working closely with affected plan sponsors to carefully track affected employees who may need retirement plan transactions to help pay their storm-related expenses. For those participants being tracked, Heller said his company is preparing a number of unusual procedures such as electronically wiring funds to an alternate address if a person was displaced to somewhere else in the country.

The White House announcement about the bill signing is  here .

Benefits September 27, 2005

EEOC Sues AZ Paving Firm over Sex Harassment

September 27, 2005 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - An Arizona firm has been slapped with a federal lawsuit over charges that a supervisor harassed male workers by grabbing their genitals, simulating sex acts, and attempting to kiss them.
Reported by

The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which filed the suit in US District Court in Tucson against the Phoenix-based Sunland Asphalt, charged that another employee exposed himself while still another worker urinated on his co-workers, according to the Arizona Daily Star. The company is a paving contractor.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANSPONSOR NEWSDash daily newsletter.

The alleged harassment and retaliation began in 1999 and continued through at least 2002, said Michelle Marshall, an EEOC lawyer who filed the lawsuit. The incidents, which involved Tucson-based employees, happened mostly in Tucson but may have also occurred at a job site in Nevada, she told the Star.

The allegations are overstated, Sunland vice president Mike McWenie told the newspaper. He said the allegations stem from just one incident that occurred in 1999. “I can’t comment on any of the details or the personalities involved. All I can tell you is that we feel like we have complied with all federal and state laws on this,” McWenie told the newspaper. “This is something that happened well over two years ago. I’m at a loss. I’m baffled it has come to this.”

The EEOC has asserted that employees who filed complaints were forced to quit because the harassment was severe and supervisors were unwilling to correct improper behavior. When one employee, also seeking a promotion, complained about the harassment, a supervisor told him “you can forget about becoming foreman,” according to the lawsuit.

«