Leaderboard

The partner may be a partner in name only but is an independent contractor to the firm who receives a 1099 misc. Law firms designate an IC with clients as a partner to boost the attorneys profile with clients but the partner will be paid as an IC based on his/her own billings. Some law firms designate employees as partners but are paid as w-2 employees. If the partner is an IC for tax purposes then that person can establish a solo 401k plan.

"What! You tricked me into getting everything done before the actual deadline? How dare you!"

Is a recordkeeper's QDRO-review service worthwhile? Yes. I find that the plan administrator often times needs someone to review the QDRO. Maybe it is because I work in the TPA world I find our reviews are better then the attorney's. While the attorney is often times very sharp on the law they tend to have never had to deal with the practical aspects of QDROs. Just read a random selection of QDRO questions on this board. What at first glance seems like a reasonable description that is very specific on who to split the accounts often times isn't very clear when the TPA looks at it. Simple example that happens all the time with ESOPs. Since most attorneys are used to 401(k) plans that are valued daily we get ESOP QDROs that will say split the account as of 9/8/2015. The reality is the valuation only happens once a year for most ESOPs and if it is a calendar year plan that mean the last annual work was done 12/31/2014. So do we split the account as of the 12/31/2014 value as that is the value as of 9/8/2015 (my preferred answer by the way) or do you reject the QDRO as not having a good enough description of how to split the account (the preferred answer of some of my co-workers at this ESOP specialized firm)? Like I said to many attorneys why wouldn't you give the date of the divorces as the date to value the account for the split? To an ESOP TPA that causes issues. An ESOP TPA will note this on a review every time. Even when I review a QDRO while I think my answer is good I note the issue in my review for the plan administrator to decide if they want to reject the QDRO or not. Back when I did 401(k) plans I found often times an attorney signed off on a QDRO only to have me start to ask really good questions that pointed out that the order isn't clear on earnings from the date of split to date of payment and I could go on. Once again read all the QDRO questions on the board and you see real quick a lot of practical issues get missed until the TPA is forced to deal with the QDRO.

Just an issue of style, I've only pressed auditors when the matters are material -- especially when the client's fees to get it "right" exceed the value of getting it right.