Leaderboard

I think you're getting at is whether or not modifying the true-up provision counts as a modification of the matching formula; in other words, whether or nor this change would fall under one of the prohibited changes outlined in Notice 2016-16, a mid-year change to modify a formula used to determine matching contributions. The "at least 3 months prior to the end of the plan year" exception would not apply in this case, given that the year is almost over (I'm assuming plan year = calendar year). To me, it does. While you could argue this is a modification of a procedure rather than of the formula per se, the result is potentially higher matching contributions to some participants as a result of a mid-year change. I don't know that the argument "well, the matching percentage specified in item X.Y of the AA hasn't changed" will hold up when the end result is additional contributions being made that were not provided for in the original document. I'm mostly concerned about who's benefiting as a result of the change. Is this mostly intended to help out HCEs who just realized they're losing out on match by contributing the 402(g) max right at the end of the plan year? Of course other people could benefit from the true-up as well, but it seems like this would raise eyebrows. The extremely limited amount of time remaining in the plan year after the notice is given further limits how much benefit NHCEs could get from the change. Maybe I'm being overly cautious, but I'd wait until 1/1/18.

thanks for the kind words. indexed limits and soc sec.xlsx yes, in fact I thought it did, though I think it was only doing the projection to age 65 at that age. certainly unintentional on my part. I copied the cells down further and increased the range. this version should do the trick

Query whether the client should be spending any time, much less money, exploring NQDC at this moment given the House tax proposal.

The problem is that the IRS is not consistent in how they enforce the CE requirements. Circular 230 § 10.6 (e) (2) (i) states that you need 72 hours including 6 hours of ethics per enrollment cycle 230 § 10.6 (e) (2) (ii) states that you need a minimum of 16 hours of continuing education credit, including two hours of ethics or professional conduct, during each enrollment year of an enrollment cycle. The requirement is clearly there. Whether they follow the rules is a different question. Unless you have it in writing that you can ignore § 10.6 (e) (2) (ii), I would be very careful. What happens if you get another person reviewing your renewal? I know people who have gotten renewals when they had less than 72 hours in a cycle or lacked the ethics credits. They were told to do an additional credit in their next cycle. I also know people who have had to fight tooth and nail to get their renewals because their paperwork never made it to the appropriate office even though they had proof of delivery. Follow Circular 230 and you are always safe. It isn't worth risking a credential that you can no longer test for.

It's definitely 2014, 2015, and 2016 for you. My renewal was Sept 2016 and my CE years were 2013, 2014 & 2015. My last renewal before this (Sept 2013), I was confused by this and thought it was 10/1 to 9/30. I didn't have the right amount of CEs for the calendar years 2010, 2011, 2012. In fact I forgot to renew before the June 2013 deadline. It wasn't until I applied for my PTIN renewal in Dec 2013 that I realized. I called to ask what to do, and they made an agreement to take extra CEs then and apply. My ERPA was renewed - but just at a later time and I guess for the interim period (Sept 2013 until I got the renewal in early 2014), I was not allowed to "practice before the IRS". I was worried that I wouldn't be able to renew, but that wasn't the case. During this process and phone calls they confirmed the CE years were calendar. For my current renewal in 2016 I did everything correctly and timely. In November when I still hadn't received the renewal I called and they said it wasn't processed yet. They checked while I was on the phone and said everything was in order and sent the renewal out. The bottom line is they take your word for it on the renewal form, and we are supposed to have the proof in our files should they want to audit it. The CE tracker they provide is useless because one may have CEs that aren't reported there and they don't check that for proof when we apply for renewal (I think).

The CE requirements are in Circular 230, 10.6 (e):

FYI, the record keeping requirements ETA mentioned above can be found in Circular 230 §10:6 (h). (h) Recordkeeping requirements. (1) Each individual applying for renewal must retain for a period of four years following the date of renewal the information required with regard to qualifying continuing education credit hours. Such information includes — (i) The name of the sponsoring organization; (ii) The location of the program; (iii) The title of the program, qualified program number, and description of its content; (iv) Written outlines, course syllibi, textbook, and/or electronic materials provided or required for the course; (v) The dates attended; (vi) The credit hours claimed; (vii) The name(s) of the instructor(s), discussion leader(s), or speaker(s), if appropriate; and (viii) The certificate of completion and/or signed statement of the hours of attendance obtained from the continuing education provider. (2) To receive continuing education credit for service completed as an instructor, discussion leader, or speaker, the following information must be maintained for a period of four years following the date of renewal — (i) The name of the sponsoring organization; (ii) The location of the program; (iii) The title of the program and copy of its content; (iv) The dates of the program; and (v) The credit hours claimed.