Benefits Law Update
        Practical advice from Verrill attorneys

        Required Minimum Distributions and Missing Plan Participants

        by Kimberly S. Couch on January 27, 2022

        In January of 2021, we published two blog posts regarding Department of Labor (“DOL”) guidance on missing retirement plan participants. The first post describes DOL guidance on best practices for locating missing retirement plan participants. The second post describes the DOL’s Terminated Vested Participants Project (“TVPP”), which was initiated to encourage consistent DOL audit practices and voluntary compliance by plan fiduciaries to maintain better (i) recordkeeping for participant benefits (eligibility date and amount) and contact information, (ii) communication procedures for participants approaching the plan’s normal retirement age and the age to receive required minimum distributions (“RMDs”), and (iii) search procedures to locate missing participants. These posts are available here and here.

        RMDs and IRS Field Directive

        In May of 2021, the IRS issued a field directive to all examination agents on missing participants and beneficiaries and RMDs under Section 401(a)(9) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Code”). The directive defines when a participant is considered “missing” and states that the failure to make timely RMDs to participants who are not “missing” will potentially disqualify a qualified retirement plan, exposing the plan sponsor and participants to taxes and penalties. The IRS field directive did not receive a great deal of attention last year because it was incorporated into the IRS’s lengthy Employee Plans Examination Guidelines in the IRS Manual.[1] Unfortunately, plan sponsors that are currently undergoing IRS audits are experiencing the full effect of the IRS field directive.

        Under Section 401(a)(9) of the Code, a participant in a qualified retirement plan is required to commence distributions under the plan by April 1 following the later of (i) the calendar year in which the participant retires or (ii) the calendar year in which the participant attains age 72 (age 70-½, if the participant attained age 70-½ on or before December 31, 2019). If a participant does not receive a timely RMD, he or she is subject to 50% excise tax on the RMD amount. Separate RMD rules apply to the beneficiaries of deceased participants. In general, if a participant dies before benefit payments commence, the participant’s benefits under the plan must be (i) distributed in full to his or her designated beneficiary within five years after the participant’s death[2] or (ii) paid over the life of the designated beneficiary and commence within one year of the participant’s death.[3] If the designated beneficiary is the participant’s surviving spouse, payments are not required to begin before the participant would have attained age 72.

        The IRS Form 5500 Examination Procedures make it clear that the failure of a qualified retirement plan to make timely RMDs to participants is a qualification failure. A retirement plan must commence RMDs to plan participants by their required beginning dates regardless of whether the participants have made elections to commence their benefits under the plan or have failed to respond to notices regarding their RMD commencement dates. A plan will be treated as failing to satisfy Code Section 401(a)(9) unless the only reason for the plan’s failure to make a timely RMD is that the participant or beneficiary is missing. A participant or beneficiary is treated as “missing” only after a diligent search that includes all of the following steps:

        • a search for alternate contact information (address, telephone, or email) contained by the retirement plan, a related plan, the plan sponsor, and publicly-available records or directories;
        • use of a commercial locator service, a credit reporting agency, or a proprietary internet search tool for locating individuals; and
        • the mailing of a contact letter sent by U.S. Postal Service via certified mail to the last known address and to any other alternate address that is found.

        Actions for Plan Sponsors[4]

        First, plan sponsors should promptly review their retirement plan records to determine if there are terminated deferred vested participants and/or beneficiaries of deceased participants who have reached their RMD commencement dates but have not commenced their RMDs. Plan sponsors should then verify if they have good contact information for affected participants and beneficiaries. If the plan does not have good contact information for an individual, the plan sponsor should commence a diligent search using the IRS procedures described above. The plan sponsor should document in writing that all procedures in the IRS field directive have been followed and designate participants who are officially “missing” as defined in the directive.

        Second, plan sponsors must correct RMD commencement failures. A plan sponsor may be able to self-correct the plan’s failure to make timely RMDs under the IRS Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System (“EPCRS”). The plan must notify affected plan participants and beneficiaries of the failure, commence RMDs, and pay out all outstanding RMDs (plus earnings or an interest payment based on the plan’s actuarial equivalence factors). Full correction is required. If a plan sponsor self-corrects under EPCRS, the plan sponsor may avoid plan disqualification. However, affected participants and beneficiaries will be subject to the 50% excise tax on late RMDs.

        A plan sponsor may also correct RMD failures with IRS approval using the voluntary compliance program under EPCRS. If a plan sponsor uses the voluntary correction program, it may avoid plan disqualification and request a waiver of the 50% excise tax on affected plan participants and beneficiaries.

        If a plan sponsor does not correct under the self-correction or voluntary correction programs, and RMD commencement failures are discovered by the IRS on audit, the plan sponsor may face plan disqualification. To avoid disqualification, the plan sponsor may be required to pay substantial penalties under the EPCRS audit cap program.[5]

        Third, plan sponsors should incorporate the IRS guidelines for “missing participants” into their missing participant search procedures. They should also review DOL guidance on missing participants described in our 2021 blog posts (linked above) and take action to ensure participant databases, communications, and searches align with that guidance. Having good procedures in place will prevent future RMD failures.

        Please contact a member of our Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation Group if you have any questions regarding the IRS field directive on RMDs or missing participant procedures.


        [1] The field directive is incorporated into Part 4, Examining Process, Ch. 71, Employee Plans Examination of Returns, Section 4.71.1.4., Examination Objectives and Development of Issues, subsection (15), Distributions.

        [2] For defined contribution plans, effective for distributions with respect to participants who die after December 31, 2019, ten years is substituted for five years, except in the case of a beneficiary who is not a designated beneficiary.

        [3] For defined contribution plans, effective for distributions with respect to participants who die after December 31, 2019, the “payment over the life of the designated beneficiary” rule is available only to designated beneficiaries who are eligible designated beneficiaries. An “eligible designated beneficiary” means (i) a surviving spouse, (ii) a minor child, (iii) a disabled individual, (iv) a chronically ill individual, or (v) an individual who is not more than ten years younger than the participant.

        [4] The duties described in this section may be delegated to the retirement plan administrator.

        [5] The number of retired or separated participants entitled to future benefits must be reported on Form 5500. A large number of participants in this category may trigger an IRS and/or a DOL audit.

        Benefits Law Update

        Verrill’s Benefits Law Update blog delivers timely insights and practical guidance on the ever-evolving landscape of employee benefits and executive compensation. Our blog provides up-to-date analysis and commentary on a wide range of topics, including timely updates on developments in law affecting employee benefit plans and executive compensation arrangements.

        Key Contact

        Subscribe

        Looking for more great content? Subscribe for regular legal updates and information delivered right to your inbox.

        Firm Highlights

        Published Works

        Four Verrill Attorneys Co-Author Massachusetts Trends and Developments Chapter for Chambers and Partners Child Relocation 2026 Guide

        Verrill attorneys Mary H. Schmidt, Rachel A. Deering, Hannah R. Zukoff, and Mariah G. Tappan co-authored the “Trends and Developments” chapter...
        Blog

        A New Protected Class in Maine: Holders of Final Protection Orders

        In the lead-up to Domestic Violence Awareness Month in October, employers may be taking a closer look at how their policies and practices respond to...
        Alerts and Newsletters

        Verrill Secures SJC Victory for Boston Legacy FC in White Stadium Litigation

        Verrill has secured a significant appellate victory for Boston Legacy FC in the litigation challenging the redevelopment of White Stadium in...
        Blog

        Hurry Up and Wait

        This is the third in a series of Verrill blog posts on Maine’s packaging extended producer responsibility (“EPR”) law[1]. In July we reported...
        Media Mentions

        Robert Keach Discusses First Brands Chapter 11 Case in Law360

        Verrill attorney Robert Keach was recently quoted in a Law360 article examining the rejection of First Brands Group's Chapter 11 plan and the...
        Media Mentions

        Cybersecurity and AI Governance: Scott Anderson Featured in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

        Verrill Managing Partner Scott Anderson was recently featured in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly discussing how law firms can build attorney buy-in for...
        Blog

        Section 530A Account Update: ERISA Status of Trump Accounts

        The Department of Labor has issued important guidance addressing whether employer programs that permit contributions to Section 530A accounts (and...
        Press Releases

        97 Verrill Attorneys Recognized by Best Lawyers® 2027, Including Four Named Lawyers of the Year

        AUGUSTA, Maine, BANGOR, Maine, BOSTON, Mass., PORTLAND, Maine, and WESTPORT, Conn., (August 20, 2026) – Verrill is proud to announce that 97...
        Alerts and Newsletters

        SEC’s Proposed “Reg Crypto”: What Founders Need to Know

        Startup founders and emerging-growth companies have a number of options for raising capital under the federal securities laws, including Regulation D...
        Blog

        After 45 Years, the IRS Speaks on DCAP Nondiscrimination Testing – And It’s Good News

        Employers that provide a Dependent Care Assistance Program will be pleased to learn that for the first time in 45 years, the IRS has issued guidance...
        Media Mentions

        U.S. Courts Highlights Annabel Rodriguez’s Journey from Fellow to Mentor

        Verrill attorney Annabel Rodriguez was featured in a recent U.S. Courts article titled “From Fellows to Mentors: Alumni Share Lasting Lessons from...
        Media Mentions

        Robert Keach Discusses Bankruptcy Auction Strategy in Law360

        Verrill attorney Robert Keach spoke with Law360 article examining the complex bankruptcy auction process that resulted in the sale of 23 summer...