Leaderboard

Answer to the question in the title is: Plan Administrator.

I would find a new payroll provider AND a new record keeper. If the match is calculated on a payroll basis, we do not check the accuracy of it when we get the client's numbers. It's just too difficult to do. We would need from 24 to 52 (depending on pay periods) separate payrolls with comp, deferrals and deferral %'s/$'s requested by the participants. We usually just go with the ER's figures, but put in the letter that we are relying on them. However, we do a reasonableness check. For example, if the match is dollar-for-dollar up to 4% of pay, anyone over $10,800 in match for 2017 was probably not stopped at the comp limit. Some RK's just roll with anything, and I mean ANYTHING, the client gives them and just spit out a report that contains the data. Very little, if any, analysis is done. Yet another reason to use a competent TPA (like me!). If the r/k is not responsible for doing the compliance testing, I don't see why they would vet the data. Heck, you wanna give Susie McGillicutty $26,431.28 in match? Sure. Go ahead. The payroll vendor SHOULD be able to put in the compensation cap. They probably know this and forgot, but they are blaming the client for not telling them to do so... How long has this been going on?

asppa 2016 annual.self employed.IRS forms.pdf asppa 2016 annual.sole prop outline..pdf these show up and work on my end. If have problems downloading them, just message me your email and I'll email you Larry's outlines

Really? I see this as a 1099 issued in error that simply needs to be fixed. I thought the EPCRS cite was for other employer errors, such as not withholding at all. I don't deal with that much so I'm just askin' - doesn't really seem right.

Thanks RatherBeGolfing, Larry and Kevin. I appreciate the time you have taken to comment, and I also appreciate your opinions and input. Because of all of you, I feel comfortable enough to present a safe harbor plan, effective 10/1.

Agree with the others, no such requirement. And there is a definite downside, especially to an MP plan that will have a specific contribution amount for the year. In a prior firm we worked with an advisor who always opened an account with $100 in it before year end. Problem came up when we later told the client the total contribution for the year they forgot about the $100 and deposited the full amount. And would repeat this year over year. Creates more trouble than it is worth (which isn't saying much because opening the account is worth nothing).

The plan can start 10/1. The SHN should be distributed within a reasonable period before the beginning of the plan year. If the plan is established on 9/25, is it reasonable to distribute the SHN 25 days before the plan was even established? Larry and Kevin are both correct. You have until 10/1 to start the plan and 30-90 day period for the SHN is when it is deemed reasonable. If you establish the plan during September and don't drag your feet on the notice, you are fine. Personally, I wouldn't rush to crank anything out. Let it take the time it takes to make sure nothing is missed. There is nothing worse than rushing something out and having come back to bite you because you overlooked something. Call FTW support and ask to speak to the document department. They have excellent people there and they are very quick to call back if they are not available.

The actuary is plain wrong, and should know better. Usually it's an accountant that offers this old chestnut. And there is a rationale for it; a trust cannot exist UNTIL there is a corpus; that is true. However, there is no requirement that the retirement trust exist (or be funded) as long as the PLAN is in existence, which means the plan (and trust) has been adopted by the end of the year. It can be funded later (by the appropriate funding dates for deduction purposes). Too many of our practitioners don't understand that there are really two separate documents that make up a retirement plan; the PLAN document and the TRUST document. Most of us write a single document that includes both (usually with an article in the document that is actually the trust document. That is why the thing is signed BOTH by the employer, and the trustees separately.

IRS rationale was that taxpayers can't be trusted to not back-date documents and having $100 in a trust bank account provided extrinsic proof that stuff did happen on or before 12/31.

Do you keep "the first return/report" box checked if you are amending it? It's no longer the first filing.