Leaderboard

Real simple: you need to do this or we resign.

CEW, You could tell this dentist to get lost and find another provider. And when he does, the new provider would guide him to proper procedures which the dentist would probably comply. Very maddening! I would go with blunt and to the point. Like a root canal!

It depends on what you were awarded. If you were awarded a portion of each retirement payment and the retirement payments are suspended because of rehire, your portion might be suspended as well. X% of zero is zero. However, you should not “lose” your interest. When payments are resumed (and presumably in a greater monthly amount) your portion will resume. This would be an unusual situation. The plan might approach it differently. If you were awarded an annuity interest and started payments already (e.g. five years ago at former spouse’s retirement), your payments would probably be unaffected. I do not know what a statement of entitlement is.

The legal basis is the "definite written program and arrangement" requirement of Treas. reg. 1.401-1(a)(2), which is a pre-ERISA reg that remains in effect. Suffice to say that one could argue that the requirement as stated in the reg (previous sentence) is not completely "definite" itself as to exactly what it requires or means, but the IRS has been very consistent over the decades in saying that it means very close and consistent adherence to a reasonable interpretation of what the document says. In situations such as the one you describe there are sometimes different reasonable constructions of the plan language, and, failing that, sometimes the ability to get a reasonable correction in VCP.

Sorry, but that TPA should be fired, assuming that what you note as their position is indeed correct. You need advisors who will keep you OUT OF TROUBLE, not get you into trouble. Would your boss keep an accountant who has you deduct things that are not deductible on your tax return?

Might be a good reason not to allow participant loans in the plan!

Yes, some advisors and plan sponsors have read articles about making voluntary after-tax employee contributions to qualified plans. As pointed out above, these articles leave out some important points. After-tax contributions must be tested for nondiscrimination (the ACP test), even if the plan is a safe harbor 401(k) plan. That means: if zero NHCEs contribute true “after-tax employee contributions”, then the HCEs can only put in $0.00 of after-tax contributions – thus the HCEs all get a full refund back of their after-tax contributions, and if refunded too late, it is subject to a penalty. In my opinion, after-tax employee contributions should be found mainly in: An owner-only plan where the owner’s compensation is low, but the owner is sitting on a pile of cash. The after-tax contribution is needed to reach the 415 limit because the overall deduction limit is 25% of pay. A non-profit entity with no HCEs (or any plan with no HCEs for that matter). Any entity with only HCEs High skill organizations where the “NHCEs” are actually quite highly paid and those NHCEs have average deferrals that are already significantly higher than the deferrals of the HCEs without an after-tax option. Also note that after-tax employee contributions are also part of the general test for nondiscrimination under Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a)(4) – treated like a match or deferral for purposes of the average benefits test. The articles out there almost always leave out the testing problems associated with after tax contributions. They imply that this is a new concept or an obscure loophole, but it’s nothing new as mention above. After-tax has been around for longer than 401(k) plans have been around. I would not recommend including the after-tax provisions in a plan that has the typical NHCE group, but if the Employer really wants it, I recommend the HCEs not use the after-tax feature in its first year. After that first year-end, run the test to show just how much after-tax the HCEs would have been able to keep in the plan. And bill them for your extra time. You might find that some investment providers are pushing an after-tax “emergency fund” idea. The rank and file contribute after-tax and they can withdraw it at any time (yes, after-tax can be withdrawn any time). The downside of this concept is the withdrawal fee. If the distribution fee is perhaps $65 and the NHCE has an after tax balance of $650, well that’s a 10% cost to get the money back. Banks fees are much less than that. In-Plan Roth In contrast to after-tax contributions, In-Plan Roth Rollovers and In-Plan Roth Transfers (Roth conversions) are not subject to the ACP testing described above because they aren’t contributions. If the plan has both In-Plan Roth Rollovers and In-Plan Roth Transfers, the participant can convert all or any portion of their vested pre-tax balance into Roth, including balances from employer contributions, even if they are not eligible for a distribution. The IRS actually has a nice explanation of the details. https://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Designated-Roth-Accounts-In-Plan-Rollovers-to-Designated-Roth-Accounts Here is a case study with after-tax: S. Corp Owner/employee: Age 51 Eligible W-2 compensation: $60,000 Plan type: 401(k) only – owner only plan – no other employees Assume the owner’s reasonable compensation is only $60,000 (W-2 compensation). Perhaps additional income is also provided from S Corp dividends, but that can't count for plan compensation purposes. The deduction limit is 25% of $60,000, or $15,000. However, the 415 contribution limit for 2017 is $60,000 (the lesser of 100% of pay or $54,000, plus catch-up deferrals). Even with elective deferrals included, the maximum pre-tax contribution available is only $39,000 ($24,000 + $15,000), leaving $21,000 of the contribution limit unused (see figures below). By adding an after-tax contribution option, this business owner now has the ability to put more money away for retirement in the 401(k) plan by utilizing the entire 415 limit including catch-up deferrals. You'll have to scroll, probably, to see the figures below to the right, but its $24,000 deferral, $15,000 profit sharing, and $21,000 after-tax. Elective Deferral (includes $6,000 catch-up): $24,000 Employer Profit Sharing (limited to 25% of pay): $15,000 After-tax Contrib. (can convert to Roth): $21,000 Total Contributions: $60,000 I hope this helps.

They do not count against the 404(a)(7) limit. So , yes, it can be good for an owner-only DB/DC combo where the owner is not wanting (or needing) all contributions to be tax deductble.