Jump to content

Determination Application - Letter 1014


Guest ljsc

Recommended Posts

I submitted an on-cycle (cycle A) application for a determination letter. It was an up-to-date and restated plan. However, I received the entire application back, with a letter 1014. Letter 1014 is a form letter that states that the plan was either submitted off-cycle or not restated for EGTRRA and other required changes. I have called the agent, but not heard back yet. Has anyone else had an application returned inexplicably?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used 5300. I have now found out that the reason for the return of the application was that I still had EGTRRA changes in a separate section, rather than incorporated throughout the plan. I have 30 days to correct and resubmit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Williams

We just had a submission returned also. After talking to the agent, the reason for the return was that the plan document was not in the form of a working copy. As background, this plan was previously entitled to reliance as a volume submitter document, but was amended and now clearly does not meet requirements (not a bad thing - this way we were able to file in Cycle A and get a letter sooner). The problem is that the plan document consists of a base document, "check-the-box" volume submitter document and several amendments. Any ideas on the most efficient way to combine these into a working copy? Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a package returned to me. The amendments had been integrated into a working copy. However, the EGTRRA amendment that was integrated into the working copy called itself a "good faith amendment," and the agent told me there needed to be a "final EGTRRA amendment." I suspect that the good faith amendment for this defined benefit plan (a very vanilla type plan) will be good enough for a final EGTRRA amendment, but I'm having to review to be sure.

Question: Is there an IRS checklist on the "final" EGTRRA rules? Or is there model IRS language for these rules?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a followup to anyone interested, I talked to the IRS agent. The problem was that though we had prepared a working document, we had not moved the EGTRRA provisions out of the separate EGTRRA artcle to the sections of the plan that they modified. For example, there were top heavy changes made by the EGTRRA amendment that the IRS agent wanted integrated into the actual top heavy article of the Plan. The agent would like to be able to read the document straight through without referring to separate articles of the plan with sections that begin "notwithstanding other provisions of the plan . . . " That appears to be the entire issue and the reason it was returned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest msheavy

We also are having some application returned. The discussion above has been helpful and we are ready to re-submit our filings.

My question is - Who do we re-submit to? The original submission address or do we address it to the agent who returned the filings?

Thanks for any response!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The agent I talked to said we should resubmit it to the original address. All the old documents/forms can be sent in, with a new draft plan and a new check. (The old check will be returned). She said I could put her name as well, i.e: "attention: agent." That is what I did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Guest pennywise
The agent I talked to said we should resubmit it to the original address. All the old documents/forms can be sent in, with a new draft plan and a new check. (The old check will be returned). She said I could put her name as well, i.e: "attention: agent." That is what I did.

I'm glad :blink: to find out that I'm not the only person that had a plan sent back. I was starting to feel terrified that I could be the worst attorney EVER. I just got a plan back today that was a amended out of prototype and offset with an individually designed cash balance plan...and it was sent back because it was a 'prototype'!!! apparently it didn't look individually designed enough.

this is going to be a fun summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...