Posted on Apr 16, 2018

The Department of Labor and IRS are ramping up efforts to improve compliance in corporate employee benefit plan administration. Frequent errors point to inadequate or improper administration by organizations, but also to auditors that lack the proper training and experience to conduct a technically appropriate employee benefit plan audit. Failure to make improvements can result in penalties and fines to companies and organizations — and even criminal charges in severe cases. That’s why it’s so important to choose an 401k Plan Audit team with experience once your organization reaches 100 eligible participants.

When seeking a quality, independent public accountant to perform a financial statements audit of your employee benefit plan, the AICPA outlines several guidelines to consider. First of all, auditors found to be out of compliance with professional standards had the following characteristics:

  • Inadequate technical training and knowledge
  • Lack of awareness regarding the unique factors of employee benefit plan audits
  • Lack of established quality review and internal process controls for each audit
  • Misperception that EBP audits are simply fulfilling a governmental requirement
  • EBP audits encompassing a very small percentage of the firm’s overall audit practice
  • Missing necessary audit work
  • Misinterpreting the limited scope audit exception
  • Limited time to adapt to new technical guidance

As you can see, there are many telltale signs that a potential auditor may not be highly qualified. When seeking an auditor, you must know how to evaluate knowledge and experience, licensing and ability to perform tests unique to employee benefit plan audits. Such tests may include:

  • Finding whether plan assets covered by the audit are fairly valued
  • Unique aspects of plan obligations
  • Timeliness of plan contributions
  • How plan provisions affect benefit payments
  • Allocations to participant accounts
  • Issues that may affect the plan’s tax status
  • Transactions prohibited under ERISA

Less experienced auditors may be assigned to perform routine aspects of the audit, but you need to make sure that a more experienced employee benefit plan auditor will be reviewing that work as well as performing more complicated aspects of the audit.

When looking for a quality, independent auditor, you might start by asking for references and discuss the quality of work with other EBP clients. Ask the firm about recent training and continuing education specific to employee benefit plans. Another simple way to compare quality auditors with one another is to search for the firms that are members of the AICPA Employee Benefit Plan Audit Quality Center (EBPAQC). These firms have made a voluntary commitment to audit quality by adhering to higher standards in their policies, procedures and training. At a minimum, auditors for these plans must be licensed or certified as public accountants through a state authority.

“The DOL noted that firms with membership in the AICPA EBPAQC had fewer audit deficiencies. By contrast, most CPAs performing the fewest audits and showing the most deficiencies were not members.” —U.S. Department of Labor

Given all of these factors, one more distinction that must be identified is if the firm has sufficient independence to satisfy ERISA standards for third-party reporting. An independent auditor or its employees, for example, should not also maintain the financial records for the employee benefit plan. The same firm may perform tax filing, but accounting work may be deemed a conflict of interest that would affect an objective audit report. For more information on selecting a quality auditor for EBP financial statement audits, refer to the AICPA report, http://bit.ly/1SN8w0h

The report even provides guidelines on developing a detailed RFP to engage auditors.

To download the full whitepaper, click here: Choose Your Auditor Carefully for Employee Benefit Plans

As you can see, plan administrators have a greater burden to hire a qualified auditor, given evolving training and certification of auditors and the complexity of the audit itself. It will greatly benefit any plan administrator or trustee to schedule time with a EBP auditor at Cornwell Jackson to understand these changes and pursue additional training if necessary.

Posted on Jan 17, 2017

Given the role that deferred compensation plans play in attracting and retaining executives and key employees, it’s important that the non-qualified plans operate according to applicable law and are designed in a way that maximizes value to participants. Unfortunately, because these plans can be complex, compliance errors, as well as administration and communication mistakes, can easily occur, negating the advantages that companies intended to provide.

Typical Non-Qualified Plans

Non-qualified deferred compensation (NQDC) plans typically fall into four categories, according to the IRS:

1. Salary Reduction Arrangements simply defer the receipt of otherwise currently includible compensation by allowing the participant to defer receipt of a portion of his or her salary.

2. Bonus Deferral Plans resemble salary reduction arrangements, except they enable participants to defer receipt of bonuses.

3. Top-Hat Plans (also known as Supplemental Executive Retirement Plans or SERPs) are NQDC plans maintained primarily for a select group of management or highly compensated employees.

4. Excess Benefit Plans are NQDC plans that provide benefits solely to employees whose benefits under the employer’s qualified plan are limited by tax code section 415.

Note: Despite their name, phantom stock plans are NQDC arrangements, not stock arrangements.

The Legal Requirements

Although non-qualified deferred compensation plans are not qualified, they must follow the guidelines of Internal Revenue Code Section 409A. This tax code section covers the timing of non-qualified plan elections, funding, distributions and documentary compliance requirements.

Regulations under Section 409A are lengthy and complex. Failure to follow them can wipe out the intended tax breaks of income deferral under a non-qualified arrangement. Noncompliance can also subject amounts to a 20 percent tax penalty and interest.

Choosing the right investment vehicles for a non-qualified deferred compensation plan is critical because mistakes can result in trouble with the IRS, as well as the possibility of underperformance. If the plan is set up to mirror the company’s 401(k) plan, with administration by the plan vendor, tax problems can occur when participants reallocate their investments.

Regardless of who administers the plan, investment choices should reflect the diversification that is usually desired by top earning executives, with attention paid to avoiding investment vehicles that may appear attractive but may have unintended tax consequences. The services of an investment professional knowledgeable in non-qualified deferred compensation plans can be invaluable in avoiding pitfalls in this area.

Because non-qualified deferred compensation plan participants are high-level employees, a company sometimes assumes that they readily understand the plan. Therefore, the company may not make the same communication efforts that are generally undertaken with plans for rank-and-file employees.

Don’t underestimate the importance of clear, thorough and up-to-date communications. Participation can be hampered if eligible executives don’t understand the plan benefits. Even if executives do participate, poor communications can result in misunderstandings and, sometimes, lawsuits.

Participants should know what they have coming to them and any risks associated with participation, such as the status of their non-qualified benefits if the company becomes insolvent or what if their employment terminates before retirement.

In addition to educating executives about the plan, the sponsoring company must ensure that it realizes the full extent of the obligations the plan is creating down the road. If not managed properly, promises made to today’s executives can become burdensome to tomorrow’s shareholders, drain future corporate coffers and put a strain on the ability of the company to remain competitive in its industry.

Non-qualified deferred compensation plans can certainly enhance a company’s executive pay package and thus be an excellent executive recruitment and retention tool. However, common and easily made mistakes can turn what should be an advantage into a quagmire of unintended consequences.

Careful strategic planning, regular reviews and the assistance of qualified tax and legal counsel can help to avoid errors in compliance, administration and communications. Contact your CJ Benefit Plan Advisor with any questions.

Posted on Apr 13, 2016

The primary objective of a benefit plan’s financial statements is to provide information that is useful in assessing the plan’s present and future ability to pay benefits.

Benefit Plan Audit Guide

Financial reporting for employee benefit plans financial statement audits may involve many parties, including the plan sponsor’s financial accounting and human resources departments, a third-party administrator, investment trustees and custodians, an actuary, ERISA legal counsel and the independent auditor. Plan management may hire service organizations to perform record keeping and reporting functions, but the ultimate responsibility for accurate financial reporting rests with plan management.

One of the most important duties of plan management is to hire the independent auditor. In some cases the plan sponsor may have an audit committee, employee benefits committee or administrative committee that oversees the financial reporting process, including internal control over financial reporting and the appointment, compensation and oversight of the independent auditor. The plan financial reporting and audit environment is unique in many respects, including the nature of plan operations; the various laws and DOL and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations with which plans must comply; and special reporting and audit requirements. These matters, which affect every plan, add to the complexity of an employee benefit plan audit. Other matters that may complicate the plan reporting and audit process may include changes to the plan document; plan mergers, freezes or terminations; and changes in service organizations.

Purpose and Objectives of the Independent Audit

The Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) generally requires employee benefit plans with 100 or more participants to have an independent financial statement audit as part of the plan sponsor’s obligation to file a Form 5500.

Financial statement audits provide an independent, third-party opinion to participants, plan management, the DOL and other interested parties that the plan’s financial statements provide reliable information to assess the plan’s present and future ability to pay benefits. A financial statement audit helps protect the financial integrity of the employee benefit plan, which helps users determine whether the necessary funds will be available to pay retirement, health and other promised benefits to participants. The audit may also help plan management improve and streamline plan operations by evaluating the strength of the plan’s internal control over financial reporting and identifying control weaknesses or plan operational errors. And the audit helps the plan sponsor carry out its legal responsibility to file a complete and accurate Form 5500 for the plan with the DOL.

The overall objectives of the plan auditor under professional standards are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error and to report on the financial statements in accordance with his or her findings. In addition, the DOL requires the independent auditor to offer an opinion on whether the DOL-required supplemental schedules attached to the Form 5500 are presented fairly in all material respects, in relation to the financial statements as a whole.

To accomplish these objectives, the auditor plans and performs the audit to obtain reasonable assurance (see a discussion of reasonable assurance below) that material misstatements, whether caused by error or fraud, are detected. The auditor assesses the reliability, fairness and appropriateness of the plan’s financial information as reported by plan management. The auditor tests evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the plan’s financial statements and DOL-required supplemental schedules; assesses the accounting principles used and significant accounting estimates made by management; and evaluates the overall financial statement presentation to form an opinion on whether the financial statements as a whole are free of material misstatement.

General Benefit Plan Audit Considerations

The following are some general audit considerations for all employee benefit plan financial statement audits.

  • Generally Accepted Auditing Standards
  • Adequate Technical Training and Proficiency
  • Professional Skepticism
  • Auditor Independence
  • Reasonable Assurance and Materiality
  • Professional Judgment
  • Auditor Communications

Full Scope vs. Limited Scope Benefit Plan Audits

Typically, financial statement auditors are engaged to audit and report on the reporting entity’s financial statements, including all assets; liabilities and obligations; and financial activities. These audits are performed without any client-imposed scope limitation or other restriction. ERISA is unique in that, when certain criteria are met, it permits plan management to instruct the auditor to limit the scope of testing of investment information included in the financial statements. This limited scope election must be supported by a certification from a qualified entity as to both the accuracy and completeness of the plan’s investment information. Such audits are referred to as “limited scope” audits. Plan management is responsible for determining that the conditions of the limited scope audit exemption have been met.

Full Scope vs. Limited Scope Image

Benefit Plan Audit Areas

The financial statement audit for employee benefit plans typically cover employee and employer contributions; benefit payments; plan investments and investment income (full scope audits); participant data; participant allocations; liabilities and plan obligations; loans to participants; and administrative expenses. In addition, the auditor considers other matters that may affect the financial statements, as shown below.

Benefit Plan Audit Areas

EBPAQC-Plan-Advisory-on-EBP-Financial-Statement-Audit CoverTo learn more about benefit plan audits, and to find out if one is required for your company’s 401(k) plan, download the whitepaper here: Guide to Employee Benefit Plans – Financial Statement Audits Whitepaper The Whitepaper includes:

  • Plan Financial Reporting and Audit Process and Management’s Responsibilities
  • Purpose, Objectives, and Benefits of an Independent Audit
  • General Audit Considerations
  • Full Scope vs. Limited Scope
  • Audit Areas
  • The Audit Process
  • Auditor’s Report
  • Your Role in the Audit Process
  • Additional Resources

For more specific information about how the requirement of an benefit plan audit will affect your company, contact our in-house expert, Mike Rizkal, CPA.