A recent IRS ruling arose because one employer proposed amending its 401(k) plan to include a student loan repayment benefit. The employer already provided a generous matching contribution of 5 percent of employee compensation if an employee contributed 2 percent or more of compensation to the plan.
The employer proposed employees to instead enroll in a voluntary student loan benefit program under which the employer would make a 5 percent “matching” contribution on behalf of any employee who made a student loan repayment of 2 percent or more of their compensation. (This would technically be a nonelective employer contribution, since it would not “match” any employee contributions but it would replace the employer matching contributions for those receiving the nonelective employer contribution.) Employees who enroll in the voluntary student loan benefit program would have this nonelective contribution replace their normal matching contribution, and employees who did not enroll still would be eligible for the normal matching contribution.
In a private letter ruling, the IRS ruled the proposed program would not violate 401(k) plan rules. It’s important to note that private letter rulings only apply to the party requesting the ruling, but they are generally taken as insight into how the IRS views a particular issue, so this is an encouraging development for employers and their younger employees alike.
In this case, the IRS stated that participation in the proposed program must be voluntary, and participants who make student loan repayments also must be permitted to make elective deferrals. The nonelective contributions matching the student loan payments still would be subject to the usual qualification rules, such as vesting, coverage, nondiscrimination testing, contribution limits, and eligibility and distribution rules. Furthermore, the employer must not extend any student loans to employees eligible for the program.
This ruling offers employers a new strategy to attract and retain employees for whom a traditional 401(k) match may not be appealing.
This article was written by John Arendshorst from Grand Rapids Business Journal and was legally licensed through the NewsCred publisher network. Please direct all licensing questions to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The views of the author of this article do not necessarily represent the views of Gradifi. We make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained here. Readers should consult their own attorneys or other tax or financial advisors to understand the tax, financial and legal consequences of any strategies mentioned in this article.