Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/15/2018 in Posts

  1. One of my pet peeves is people who think we need to know what their irrelevant pet peeves are. No one is forcing you to read these messages, but you might want to read my substantive answers to questions raised.
    2 points
  2. KEB

    Surviving Spouse?

    Why on earth would anyone on a cruise be on here answering questions?? You must be bored out of your mind! One of my pet peeves is when people need to make sure others know they are on vacation. Really???
    1 point
  3. Not enough info provided to give a definitive answer, so keep that in mind. HIPPA allowsa for different contribution levels, so I would say a 98% yes it is ok. But if the plan is self-funded, or if the premiums are run through a 125 plan, you should test for non-discrimination for both. Highly unlikely, but possible for discrimination in one of these.
    1 point
  4. Belgarath

    RMD after termination

    I respectfully disagree with your analysis of 1.402(c)(a)(7)(a). A distribution is in fact required for the distribution calendar year. The fact that you can delay it until April first of the following year does not alter that fact. The April 1 distribution taken in the following year is the required distribution for the PRIOR year. then you take the second distribution - the one for the current year - be December 31. IMHO you are overthinking this.
    1 point
  5. Form 2848. You are still limited in practice areas but getting a POA to speak to the IRS directly is a big plus for practitioners who are not an attorney, CPA/EA, or enrolled actuary.
    1 point
  6. The answer is YOU ABSOLUTELY MAY NOT allow this one union member in the plan UNLESS the bargaining unit has provided for such a benefit in the bargaining agreement that covers these folks. If you let him in and the bargaining agreement does not permit it, you have engaged in an unfair labor practice. Letting the one employee in without negotiating the benefit is a forbidden union "busting" technique. This is also the reason why every non-collectively bargained plan of any sort should exclude collectively bargained employees. My limited experience is that the bargaining unit will not likely permit one member in and not the others. Bill William D. Roberts Attorney ebplans@hallrender.com | vCard | @hallrender on Twitter Hall, Render, Killian, Heath & Lyman, P.C. 603 Munger Avenue, Suite 350 | Dallas, TX 75202 D: (502) 568-9364 | C: (502) 314-6667 | F: (214) 615-2001
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use