Leaderboard

You would have a 10 month short plan year from 3/1 - 12/31. Hard to say if it will negatively impact the employer. The answer is probably not in most cases but I'm sure someone could come up with a set of facts where the employer would be better off with the Plan running on FYE instead of CYE.

I would be curious to see the argument for why some people think they should not be keys for 2015.

Just in case, the existence of a collective bargaining unit is not the only relevant condition. See IRC 410(b)(3)(A), and note especially the phrase beginning with "if": (3) Exclusion of certain employees For purposes of this subsection, there shall be excluded from consideration— (A) employees who are included in a unit of employees covered by an agreement which the Secretary of Labor finds to be a collective bargaining agreement between employee representatives and one or more employers, if there is evidence that retirement benefits were the subject of good faith bargaining between such employee representatives and such employer or employers,...

No.

Yes they go on the top heavy test for 2015. They are 5% owners. Generally determine top heavy status on last day of preceding PY: 12/31/2015 to determine TH status for calendar year plan for 2016. Exception: for first year of new plan, use last day of first PY. Heated discussion? Interesting.....

So he's not really "forced" to sell his home. It's just that circumstances are such that it's the best way to accomplish his goal. He is not being "evicted." He has a "bill" from his ex-wife for $30,000, and selling the house is an unfortunate way to satisfy that debt. It is not a letter from the bank that says "pay up or get out." he already "owns" the house, so he would not be purchasing a principal residence. This is all assuming the plan uses merely the safe harbor conditions for issuing hardship distributions.

Ignoring prior service for eligibility purposes under the "rule or parity" would only apply if the rehired employee terminated at zero per cent vesting. Once there is any vesting, all prior service would count upon rehire, and participation would be immediate. Since this person presumably had some level of vesting (?) then entry is immediate. P.S. - I suppose the plan could be using the "one year hold out" rule which would require retroactive re-entry if requirements are satisfied, but I personally never see this in 401(k) plans. (others may have a different opinion) However, you should check your plan document to confirm.

Have you ever tried to use voice recognition software? The posts above are the words that the software thinks I am saying!

I think your amendment has to answer that question and ought to do so very clearly. You can write the amendment to give back years of service or only going forward. (See My 2 Cent's comments about discrimination and so forth). But a vague amendment is only going to be trouble. You are going to have to constantly explain why it isn't retro if it is silent to people who didn't work 1,000 hours in the past but worked 500 This is a great example of a time you really want to think about how to word an amendment to make sure you don't create any unintended consequences. For example is the 500 hours after 8/1 or for all of 2016? (Assuming a 12/31 PYE) I would make the amendment clear on that point. I would think it is all of 2016 but state that.

My first impression is, "what does your service agreement say"? It may be that you are contracted to prepare the 5500 forms but not the 1099-Rs.

From what I recall, he must have had the written election on/by 12/31/2015. Cannot elect to defer after-the-fact. If he had a written election and mistakenly did not withhold then that would be a different story.

If the Plan is matching on a per payroll basis, probably best to fix it now and going forward. Sounds like it is an administrative system that needs some updating.

^ and the taxpayer can claim the $6,000 over 402(g) as a "catch-up", but neither plan is affected. So, the only concern for this plan (or the other one) is if the participant contributed more than $24,000 combined. And if it's split up between two or more plans, it's up to the participant to notify one or more of the plan administrators of his error.

How do you sign up for "Catch-up contributions only"? You can't make catch-up contributions until you have hit some applicable limit, either plan imposed or IRS imposed.