Leaderboard

Most likely the people negotiating the contract were oblivious to the ERISA requirements. Could you require the weekly or monthly hours until such time as the participant reaches 1000 hours, then include them retroactively for the year? It would be an operational nightmare, but if someone terminated before reaching 1000 hours, it could have the desired impact.

Termination post-closing of the acquisition cannot be a distributable event unless you satisfy the 2% exception.

This is a LATE interim amendment. It must be done by Feb. 1 for this particular employer because it's 5-year RAC ends on Feb. 1 and it it's not done by Feb. 1 the VCP compliance fee is much greater than $375.

clarification when you run coverage testing you pass if ratio % > than the safe harbor and whatever else (e.g avg ben pct test) if that fails, you can get by if ratio > unsafe harbor and you have a note from your mom that says it is ok, you sacrifice a goat and a bunch of other stuff (or something like that) when you run nondiscrim you need to pass at least the midpoint. the unsafe % is only used to determine what the midpoint is when performing this nondiscrim test.

I thought they shut it down last year...? Only one plan left but I'll check and see if we have what we need; thanks for the heads-up. I'm sure I was told that everything would migrate over but was pretty skeptical about that. Both of those companies are in the worst...2...for service. I have no idea how Ascensus stays in business other than I suppose sales. I'm fortunate enough to make decisions about who we deal with and the one plan we had was enough to convince me that nothing else goes there, period.

Take a deep breath, get some sleep...and let it go. Believe me, I understand, but no good will come of it. If it makes you feel better, write her a "just for the record" letter explaining why things are wrong.

Don't forget if Ted Cruz gets elected there won't be anymore IRS That's gotta be one of the most cockeyed things I ever heard. I'm sure his secret plan is really to move all of the functions to the newly established Service for Internal Revenue.

As stated previously, you may need more than just the 415 reg, since the plan provisions are also important. Attached are two separate Q&As from the Gray Book, 1999-30 and 2008-48, that reiterate the IRS position. (In case you are not familiar with the Gray Book, it is the result of informal discussions between actuaries and the IRS. It carries no official weight, but can be useful in identifying IRS viewpoint for situations and questions not directly - or not completely - addressed in regulatory guidance.) GrayBook 1999.30 and 2008.48.pdf

See John See John show auditor copy of preamble to 415 regs. See John make auditor read this portion of the 415 regs page 13 of the pdf “As noted above, the final regulations provide that a plan cannot take into account compensation in excess of the section 401(a)(17) limit. In addition, the final regulations provide that elective deferrals can only be made from compensation as defined in section 415©(3). However, in applying these two rules, a plan is not required to determine a participant’s compensation on the basis of the earliest payments of compensation during a year.” see John make auditor read last sentence 100 times, and stand in the corner 415 regs.pdf

We've done it this way numerous times.