Leaderboard

That might be difficult to do with the one that has already been rolled to an IRA.

Thank you for all of that information. I understand now and I see what you are talking about. Thank you this is a great help.

Are there any UBTI issues?

Hopefully they will at least come through with their teaser regarding basing the audit on people with balances.

Reviving this topic to add some comments from ASPPA Annual - Judging by comments made in several sessions, the new 5500 will not be ready for 2019 - Current estimates indicate that software providers will need at least 2 years to develop, code, and test the systems for the new 5500. This would mean that they would need to have guidance early 2017 to be functional for 2019. This does not seem to be even remotely likely - DOL funding is an issue. No funding, no guidance, no new 5500 - Don’t expect any big changes until a few years into the next decade - IRS only changes could come sooner but were once again delayed The best way to avoid dealing with major changes to 5500 reporting? Retire J (at least that was the closing argument made by Janice Wegesin)

No I don't see a discrimination issue (unless you take into account some outliers like FMLA leaves), but do see a processing timing issue. For example, we pay biweekly on every other Friday. To have anything posted to that check, payroll needs the information NO later than the previous Friday to input it prior to payroll running on the Monday of the paycheck week. Each company/payroll is going to have a set schedule that they run payroll on. Some may be more flexible/quicker, but generally they also have to deal with a few days for direct deposit timing/mailing paychecks, transferring data out, etc. So, in a worst case example, if someone were to request a loan on Tuesday October 25th and payroll was run on Monday October 24th to be paid the 28th (today), they would have to wait until the paycheck dated November 11th to have the deduction come out (assuming the request made it through that transfer process either automatically from online loan request or by paper/entered by hand), then processed on the 11th's payroll and then a day or two (or more) to forward it to the TPA for the TPA to then process the transaction through its system and check to see it was paid prior to processing the loan. I doubt theTPA can see payroll reports and can look at them prior to actual payday (but after payroll processing). We never got information back in the day until the client sent all data via floppy disk/online data transfer/upload (which might mean extra programming on that side for payroll to be able to send that back to them electronically). Unless the employer is going to assume the deduction will happen correctly and not wait on payroll but just put it through on the next check. But that gets into a small risk of it not getting paid by the participant. Yes $75 is a pretty small amount that should go through, but what happens if it doesn't? What happens if that person is on unpaid leave and never returns and never gets another check? Are you going to deny a loan because someone is on FMLA? You can't unless you deny loans for everyone on every type of leave or you would be discriminating illegally for the employee taking FMLA. Who is going to eat the $75 fee? Or does the loan just not happen? Does the TPA wait to get the $75 before ever doing anything? It just seems so much simpler to leave out payroll-- I just see so many pitfalls -- they have other choices -- either have the employee pay it directly OR take it out of loan funds. Both of which would cause NO extra processing time and have a lot less pitfalls and a lot less programming/process changing to do.

I am going to take a shot at it, but realize without seeing all the documentation, it is hard to give an accurate answer. And I am not exactly sure what your difference is between the loan balance and "deemed loan balance" at 9/8/11. Did they assign some of that to you as the AP such that some of the repayments over time came back to your part of the balance? If so, you might also have some partial loan repayments to add to your total, not just earnings. Since he was earning interest on his part of the 9/8/11 balance PLUS his repaid loan payments and new contributions during that same time period, it is going to be difficult unless you can get some quarterly/annual balances and do the calculation for each period. Because as time goes on more of the earnings belong to him than to you (your $26k gets to be a smaller percentage of his account for each contribution/loan repayment that he makes). That will take time and probably more money than you want to spend to gather the information and have it calculated by a professional (can run into the hundreds of $s if not more depending on how complicated it gets which might eat up any earnings that you would be entitled to). I would try to ask for a reasonable approximation and err on his side personally. I am showing total earnings for the period around $13K, which is a little less than 9% of his current balance. Personally i would argue somewhere around $2k (or less) is reasonable if you don't want to go through the whole process (and it might be hard if no one kept the quarterly participant statements/snapshot information at different points to be able to do the same calculation over smaller periods of time to add them up). Did the new recordkeeper get any historical information from the prior? Does the employer themselves have any historical information? It's going to be tough if those answers are NO.

We have seen instances where the loan amount is increased by the loan initiation fee. The actual loan amount is paid to the participant, the loan fee is paid to whoever...

maybe I should have said "not necessarily." I'm not saying there HAS to be a vesting schedule. In fact, if you are designing a one-participant plan there probably should not be a vesting schedule. However, you could write a plan to have one in anticipation of hiring an employee who may become eligible for the plan. This way you don't have to remember to amend the plan later.

So we're told by both the TPA and the attorneys.