Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/11/2019 in Posts

  1. The proposed rule remains a proposed rule. Analyzing all comments, writing explanations about how an agency was or wasn’t persuaded to revise the proposed rule, and other work required under the Administrative Procedure Act and other Federal laws is, even for experienced agency lawyers, difficult and time-consuming work. The November 14, 2018 notice of proposed rulemaking about hardship distributions set January 14, 2019 as the due date for comments. Because the Treasury department then had a funding lapse through January 25, there have been only ten business days available for work on the comments. (And for the three lawyers assigned, this rulemaking is not the only project.)
    2 points
  2. If the client balks at this simple request, I'd hate to be in your shoes for harder "asks". Establish the importance of doing things right. It's what you're paid for, after all.
    1 point
  3. I don't think the few extra dollars inadvertently added to the match automatically constitute a PS contribution. The employer did not declare any PS contribution, they simply made an error in the match calc. If it's really small I'd say ignore it. Or "forfeit" it and use it to adjust a match deposit this year.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use