Leaderboard

Two things: 1. I "liked" your post and got a message that I wasn't allowed. Odd. 2. I spent a lot of time on PIX in my early years. Incredible resource during the early days of the internet. My screeching 2400 baud modem was a welcome sound. Got to know, Larry Starr, Derrin Watson, Jim Norman, Rick Block, Lou Filliger, Rich Bednarski, Doug Jolley, etc, etc. Great group to learn from

I remember PIX. I wasn't on that board, but our EA was. You know you are getting old when you start remembering "history."

Why isn't the plan's job to get the withholding back? Depending on how the withholding was done it is possible to make a smaller deposit on a later need and make all the forms reconcile. In other cases you might have to get a refund. But so far it looks like the participant did their part for the correction. I wouldn't have made the participant pay back the withholding in case that isn't obvious.

if the fee is $25/per then it should come out of plan assets/accounts that way. if this is a TPA fee and not recordkeeping, you're doing the same work for someone with a $1000 account as with a $50000 account, at least when it comes to including in testing, do a statement (if applicable). if that is not how the fee is determined, but how it "shakes out", then you need to really drill down into how it's determined or apportioned, what is a fixed base, what is a per participant service, and what, if anything is asset-based. maybe look at how you would charge each plan if it was separate and use that ratio to split fees.

Ah, but did you get to know Ned Ryerson? And I haven't heard the word "baud" for at least 25 years!

The line "we don't need no stinkin' badgers" was also used in the 1989 Weird Al Yankovic classic "UHF" Popular line to parody

Pretty much every opinion I have heard or read has said it is NOT preempted. I have talked to many ERISA attorneys who will outline the possible implications of non-compliance and many who take Larry's approach of "who cares, nothing is going to happen". That said, I have never talked to one who can mention a single example where non-compliance has actually become a problem.

If this is a well known issue in Florida, have any ERISA attorneys opined on whether the stamp tax as applied to ERISA plans is preempted by ERISA? It seems to me if the tax is preempted than there is no criminal exposure either.

Yes, that is part of the teaching (sic), as well as the pessimistic view that no matter how many years in a row you make 1/2 or 3/4 of a million dollars, that next year it could be slashed to "only" a few hundred thousand a cause a struggle to survive, and finally, of course, professional investment management, because we all know doctors are experts there as well! Sorry, it's cynical Thursday. Employees in for sure, and yes, could count his private practice/self employed service as well, but should be in document.

Maybe I'm missing something, but since the plan is paying the expenses, shouldn't the fee (or the formula for calculating the fee) have been disclosed ahead of time? Or are we discussing future changes?

Of course there are exceptions, but I wonder what it is about the medical professions and the greed factor. No other class of for-profit employers that I deal with so consistently leaves no stone unturned in the effort to favor themselves and shaft their employees. Is it part of the curriculum at medical school?

AlbanyConsultant, I too read the passages you quote as failing to state, at least by themselves, provisions that would meet ERISA § 205. Understand that even a document the Internal Revenue Service approved under the IRS’s program for IRC § 403(b) preapproved documents could have such a weakness and it would not mean the IRS’s reviewer missed a point. The IRS’s review does not include ERISA § 205. If you still have a task for advising your client, you might check into whether the plan is ERISA-governed or not. If ERISA § 205 governs the plan, a court would, and a fiduciary should, construe or interpret the plan to state provisions that comport with that section.

Just spit balling here but why can't he count is service as an independent contractor? If he owns a company now isn't his time as a sole proprietor part of his controlled group? I am not sure of this as I can't remember the last time I did a plan for an unincorporated business. But the claim isn't he gets to count the service with his father's business but as his own business before he purchased the father's business. After all he could have set up a KEOGH or a solo 4k plan for the two years he was an independent contractor. Had he done so he would have gotten two years of service in that plan. Maybe the question is can you count service for vesting before the plan exists and I think you can do so. I know he could write the plan for the new company to say all employees employed as of 1/1/2017 (or whatever year he set up the plan) enters on 1/1/2017. So can he count the service before the plan exists for plan entry. I am not sure the rest of you aren't looking at this incorrectly in terms of what business the prior service one ought to look to. It can't be the father's but he had a business for 2 years as an independent contractor. I am ignoring the employees for the father's plan at this point as that seems covered.

If you can make regular and fixed increase payments on the plan loan you MIGHT be able to refinance the loan to a shorter period of time. But you are then locked into the new loan terms. You will most likely not be able to go back to the old terms. There may be a cost. But if what you want is random extra payments that is most likely not going to happen with a plan loan. Retirement plans offer loans but that is not their main purpose/business so they aren't going to have the features of a bank.

Is this a good idea? Likely, that question cannot be answered here, but some considerations that might be relevant: - what is the interest rate differential of keeping the loan vs. borrowing elsewhere? - what is the likelihood that you will remain with this employer until the loan is paid off in 2030? - what are the provisions for extinguishing the loan if you leave employment? (Likely, your loan agreement already spells this out.)

This is really a question for you HR department and/or the recordkeeper that handles your plan. Many (most?) recordkeepers don't accept partial payments because their systems don't easily track the change in principle/interest that occurs when that happens. Some allow for partial payments in an exact multiple of your payment amount - but all that does is actually advance you x number of payments on your amortization schedule. Others may be able to handle partial payments. I think if you want flexibility, you best option is to secure the funds elsewhere and pay off your plan loan in its entirety.