Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Employee Classification as Part-Time or Full-Time: Not the Same Under the Affordable Care Act and ERISA

By Jerry Kalish on January 20, 2015
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

time-question-blogging-techregion-com
Some of the most difficult and contentious provisions of the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) are the employer mandate and upcoming reporting requirements effective in 2015.

“Difficult” because the employer mandate requires applicable large employers, generally those with 50 or more “full-time” employees, to offer coverage to full-time employees and dependents (other than spouses). If the employer mandate is not met, employers would be subject to penalties if a full-time employee receives government premium assistance through the marketplace. In addition, beginning this year, the ACA imposes new reporting requirements that will assist the Treasury Department in enforcing the employer and individual mandates.

“Contentious” because, well, the ACA is all about politics. Not surprisingly, the new Congress got off to a quick start. On January 8, the House passed the Save American Workers Act of 2015 which amended the Internal Revenue Code to change the definition of “full-time employee”, an employee who is  employed on average at least 30 hours a week.  The Act increases the threshold to 40 hours a week. The Act has been sent to the Senate where if passed will probably get vetoed by the President.

From a retirement plan standpoint, however, it’s different. While many employers do not want to include part-time employees in 401(k) plans for both cost and discrimination testing purposes, the IRS takes a decidedly dim view of any eligibility class that could exclude any employee who completes 1,000 hours of service. Indeed, the IRS issued guidance in 2007 regarding the extent to which part-time, temporary, seasonal, and project employees can be excluded under qualified retirement plans.

Retirement plans that improperly exclude these employees can be disqualified resulting in significant adverse tax consequences. Here are two takeaways for any concerns about this issue:

  1. Review the plan document to determine whether it has been properly drafted to exclude part-time and other non–full-time employees.
  2.  Determine whether any of those employees were correctly excluded from plan participation.

Any issues? Then take advantage of one of the available IRS correction procedures.

Jerry Kalish

Jerry Kalish is President of National Benefit Services, Inc., retirement plan consultants and administrators, which he founded in 1978 when 401(k) was enacted into law.

He is a member of the Great Lakes Area TE/GE Council, a 501(c)(3) organization whose members are benefit…

Jerry Kalish is President of National Benefit Services, Inc., retirement plan consultants and administrators, which he founded in 1978 when 401(k) was enacted into law.

He is a member of the Great Lakes Area TE/GE Council, a 501(c)(3) organization whose members are benefit practitioners who meet regularly with the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Labor on ERISA matters.

Jerry provides continuing education programs for attorneys, CPAs, and the financial services industry and has co-taught the course on non-ERISA retirement plans, 403(b) plans, and 457 plans at John Marshall School of Law LLM Program in Employee Benefits.

He is on the International Advisory Board of The Center on Business and Poverty, a non-profit organization that supports businesses and non-profits that embody the practice of participatory capitalism.

Read more about Jerry KalishEmailJerry's Twitter Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    The Retirement Plan Blog
  • Organization:
    National Benefit Services, Inc.
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo