Home Depot Sued Over Use of Plan Forfeitures

The home improvement retailer is the latest company accused of using forfeited 401(k) funds for its own benefit, instead of paying plan administrative expenses.

Home Depot Inc. and its administrative committee are facing a lawsuit filed by a former employee, accusing the retailer of misusing plan forfeitures to reduce employer contributions to the 401(k) plan.

The complaint follows a slew of other recent cases against major employers over their use of 401(k) forfeitures. Some recent examples include complaints against Siemens Corp., Nordstrom Inc. and Bank of America Corp.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

In Cano v. The Home Depot Inc. et al, filed Monday in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, a participant in the Home Depot Futurebuilder plan, Guadalupe Cano, accused the company of breaching its duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by failing to use forfeited funds to pay plan administrative expenses and instead using the funds “exclusively for the company’s own benefit.”

“Using the forfeitures to ‘reduce employer contributions’ is always in the best interest of Home Depot because that option would decrease the company’s own contribution costs,” the complaint states. “In deciding between using the forfeiture to benefit Home Depot or using the forfeitures to benefit the participants, defendants are presented with a conflict of interest in administering the plan and managing and disposing of its assets.”

Using plan forfeitures to reduce employer contributions is allowed under IRS rules, but it is also important for plan sponsors to ensure their plan documents specifically authorize this usage. The Department of Labor has not previously expressed any general concerns about the use forfeitures, except in a case last year where it successfully sued plan sponsor Sypris Solutions for applying forfeitures to reduce employer contributions, in violation of a plan provision that required that the forfeitures first be applied toward plan expenses.

In addition, the recent lawsuit accused Home Depot of failing to undertake any investigation into which option was in the best interest of the plan’s participants and beneficiaries. For example, Home Depot did not investigate whether there was a risk it would default on its matching contribution obligation if forfeitures were used to pay plan expenses, according to the complaint.

Home Depot’s administrative committee also did not consult with an independent party in deciding upon the best action for allocating the forfeitures in the plan, the complaint alleges.

The plaintiff requests that the court order the disgorgement of all assets and profits secured by Home Depot as a result of its alleged ERISA violations, as well as remove fiduciaries who breached their duties and surcharge Home Depot for any transactions deemed improper, excessive or in violation of ERISA.

According to its most recent Form 5500, the Home Depot Futurebuilder plan has more than $12 billion in assets and 460,862 participants.

The plaintiff is represented by law firms Skaar & Feagle LLP and Edelson Lechtzin LLP.

Home Depot did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a separate case against the company, the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Home Depot over a 401(k) excessive fee lawsuit earlier this month.

SPARK Meeting Seeks to Identify Roth Catch-Up Needs

Recordkeepers and payroll providers met to decide on workflow to establish implementation processes for SECURE 2.0 Roth catch-up mandates.

A retirement industry workshop on SECURE Act 2.0 of 2022 implementation held by the SPARK Institute sought to bring clarity and coordination for retirement recordkeepers and payroll providers as they prepare for new Roth catch-up provisions and so-called “super-catch-up” contributions.

In the July 16 meeting, SPARK, the Society of Professional Asset Managers and Recordkeepers, brought providers to Vanguard’s offices in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, in person and virtually. About 150 recordkeepers, payroll providers and Employee Retirement Income Security Act experts attended, with most of the focus on the catch-up provision for higher-earning participants, while the super-catch-up for people aged 60 through 63 was discussed more briefly, according to Tim Rouse, the executive director of the SPARK Institute.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan benefits news.

“We had great participation from recordkeepers and payroll providers,” Rouse says. “Now we can reassure plan sponsors that both industries have worked together, and we believe we’ve got it worked out for them.”

Rouse says the institute called the meeting to focus on the SECURE 2.0 Roth provisions due to plan sponsors “raising concerns” about the coordination required between recordkeepers and payroll providers to implement them.

The higher-contributor catch-up provisions got early attention from the industry as a potentially tricky area to implement. Under Section 603(c) of the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022, plan catch-ups from participants in 401(k), 403(b) and 457(b) plans earning at least $145,000 in the prior year are required to be made on a Roth, after-tax basis. However, widespread industry response that this would not be possible to implement quickly prompted the IRS to push that timing out to 2026.

The super-catch-up provisions, meanwhile, kicking off in 2025, offer higher catch-up capabilities for workers aged 60 through 63, up to either $10,000 or 150% of the regular catch-up amount per year, depending on which is greater.

Some specifics that emerged from the workshop, according to SPARK, included the workflow between payroll providers and recordkeepers. The group that attended the meeting also sought to address a concern about tax filing corrections. Rouse explains that a person’s income level for a given year can and “often does change,” meaning an individual who was thought not to be part of the Roth catch-up population may ultimately be in it.

“It could be weeks or months until the recordkeeper finds out that the taxpayer’s previous year income was over the $145,000 amount,” Rouse notes. “In our view, the easiest way to fix the problem is to back out the withdrawal from the incorrect catch-up contributions, with earnings, and to issue the taxpayer a 1099-R for the next year.”

To that end, SPARK filed a letter to the IRS and the Department of the Treasury on August 27 making that recommendation.

Other details of the discussions included:

For the Roth catch-up (Section 603 of SECURE 2.0):
  • Participant Identification and Reporting: Payroll providers will report the Roth catch-up population to plan sponsors, who will then inform recordkeepers; the group emphasized flexibility in reporting arrangements and timely data;
  • Threshold Calculations: Payroll providers will enforce the new Roth catch-up rules, ensuring contributions do not exceed IRS limits, with recordkeepers providing secondary validation;
  • Reconciliation of Contributions: Misapplied pre-tax contributions will be corrected via 1099-R, pending a final decision by the IRS on how such corrections should be addressed;
  • Automatic Conversion to Roth: Shifting contributions from pre-tax to Roth will be carefully managed to avoid an inconsistent participant experience; and
  • Control Groups: Plan sponsors will need to identify cases when employee movement changes their eligibility for the catch-ups, alleviating concerns for payroll providers and recordkeepers.

Super-Catch-Up (Section 109 of SECURE 2.0):

  •  Adoption Strategy: A unified approach for implementing super-catch-ups (with most recordkeepers choosing to implement automatically) and providing an “opt-out” strategy for plan sponsors; and
  • Threshold Calculations: Payroll providers will enforce super catch-up calculations, with recordkeepers providing secondary validation to ensure compliance.
SPARK has another SECURE 2.0-focused meeting coming up next month. On September 20, the group will host a meeting of industry players in Chicago at Alight’s offices and virtually. That meeting will focus on the Saver’s Match federal benefit and the DOL’s lost-and-found program.

Rouse notes that the Saver’s Match has the potential to bolster retirement savings for millions of lower-income participants. But if the setup is not simple enough, it may not get off the ground.

“Our industry very much wants this to be successful, but it’s a plan feature, and the plan sponsors will have to adopt it as a plan feature for plan sponsors that is easy to implement,” he says. “If recordkeepers turn up their nose at it, then plan sponsors will not put it in their plan.”


IRS SECURE 2.0 Reminders

In other SECURE 2.0 news, the IRS on Thursday issued a reminder to businesses about filing W-2 forms for the 2023 tax year and beyond.

In a fact sheet, the IRS points to three areas in which SECURE 2.0 makes available certain provisions for employer-sponsored plans that should be accounted for in employee W-2s.

One relates to “de minimis” (small) financial incentives (Section 113 of the SECURE 2.0 Act), which employers may offer to employees for choosing to participate in a plan: Those incentives are considered part of income.

The second concerns Roth SIMPLE and Roth SEP individual retirement accounts (Section 601 of the SECURE 2.0 Act). These provisions allow plans to provide plan participants the option to designate a Roth IRA as the IRA for contributions and an employer match. Salary reductions for participants to these Roth options are subject to federal income and other taxes; employer matching and nonelective contributions to them are not subject to withholding for federal income and other taxes.

Finally, the IRS addressed the optional treatment of employer nonelective matching contributions as Roth contributions (Section 604 of the SECURE 2.0 Act). These contributions are not subject to withholding for federal income tax and generally are not subject to withholding for Social Security or Medicare tax.

«