Leaderboard

since the person did not have a break in service it is almost as if he never quit. so enters 1/1/2010 as far as I can tell some basic documents describe it better than others, but the rules are the same (a) Rehired Participant/immediate re-entry. If any Former Employee who had been a Participant is reemployed by the Employer, then the Employee shall become a Participant as of the reemployment date, unless the Employee is not an Eligible Employee or the Employee's prior service is disregarded pursuant to Section 3.5(d) below. If such prior service is disregarded, then the rehired Eligible Employee shall be treated as a new hire. (b) Rehired Eligible Employee who satisfied eligibility. If any Eligible Employee had satisfied the Plan's eligibility requirements but, due to a severance of employment, did not become a Participant, then such Eligible Employee shall become a Participant as of the later of (1) the entry date on which he or she would have entered the Plan had there been no severance of employment, or (2) the date of his or her re-employment. Notwithstanding the preceding, if the rehired Eligible Employee's prior service is disregarded pursuant to Section 3.5(d) below, then the rehired Eligible Employee shall be treated as a new hire. (c) Rehired Eligible Employee who had not satisfied eligibility. If any Eligible Employee who had not satisfied the Plan's eligibility requirements is rehired after severance from employment, then such Eligible Employee shall become a Participant in the Plan in accordance with the eligibility requirements set forth in the Adoption Agreement and the Plan. However, in applying any shift in an eligibility computation period, the Eligible Employee is not treated as a new hire unless prior service is disregarded in accordance with Section 3.5(d) below. (d) Reemployed after 1-Year Break in Service ("rule of parity" provisions). If any Employee is reemployed after a 1-Year Break in Service has occurred, Years of Service (or Periods of Service if the Elapsed Time method is being used) shall include Years of Service (or Periods of Service if the Elapsed Time method is being used) prior to the 1-Year Break in Service subject to the rules set forth below. The Employer may elect in Appendix A to the Adoption Agreement (Other Permitted Elections) to make the provisions of this paragraph inapplicable for purposes of eligibility and/or vesting. (1) In the case of a Participant who under the Plan does not have a nonforfeitable right to any interest in the Plan resulting from Employer contributions, Years of Service (or Periods of Service) before a period of 1-Year Breaks in Service will not be taken into account if the number of consecutive 1-Year Breaks in Service equals or exceeds the greater of (A) five (5) or (B) the aggregate number of pre-break Years of Service (or Periods of Service). Such aggregate number of Years of Service (or Periods of Service) will not include any Years of Service (or Periods of Service) disregarded under the preceding sentence by reason of prior 1-Year Breaks in Service; (2) A Participant who has not had Years of Service (or Periods of Service) before a 1-Year Break in Service disregarded pursuant to (1) above, shall participate in the Plan as of the date of reemployment, or if later, as of the date the Former Employee would otherwise enter the Plan pursuant to Sections 3.1 and 3.2 taking into account all service not disregarded. Reemployment of an Employee Before a Break In Service and Before Eligibility Requirements Are Satisfied. For any Plan Year in which the eligibility requirements under Section 2.1 are based on Years of Service, if an Employee Terminates Employment with the Employer prior to satisfying the eligibility requirements in Section 2.1 and the Employee is subsequently reemployed by the Employer before incurring a Break in Service, then (1) the Employee's pre-termination Year(s) of Service (and Hours of Service during any computation period) will be counted in determining the satisfaction of such eligibility requirements, and for all other purposes, as applicable, and (2) the Eligibility Computation Period, Vesting Computation Period, and/or benefit accrual computation period, as applicable, will remain unchanged. Reemployment of an Employee Before a Break In Service and After Eligibility Requirements Are Satisfied. For any Plan Year in which the eligibility requirements under Section 2.1 are based on Years of Service, if an Employee Terminates Employment prior to the Employee's Entry Date in Section 2.1, the Employee had satisfied the eligibility requirements in Section 2.1 as of the Employee's Termination of Employment, and the Employee is subsequently reemployed by the Employer before incurring a Break in Service, then (1) the Employee will become a Participant as of the later of (A) the date that the Employee would enter the Plan had he or she not Terminated Employment with the Employer, or (B) the Employee's Reemployment Commencement Date, (2) the Employee's pre-termination Year(s) of Service (and Hours of Service during any computation period) will be counted for all purposes, and (3) the Vesting Computation Period and/or benefit accrual computation period, as applicable, will remain unchanged. Reemployment of a Participant Before a Break In Service. For any Plan Year in which the eligibility requirements under Section 2.1 are based on Years of Service, if an Employee Terminates Employment after becoming a Participant and is subsequently reemployed by the Employer before incurring a Break in Service, then (1) the reemployed Employee will reenter the Plan as of the Employee's Reemployment Commencement Date, (2) the Employee's pre-termination Year(s) of Service (and Hours of Service during any computation period) will be counted for all purposes, as applicable, and (3) the Vesting Computation Period and/or benefit accrual computation period, as applicable, will remain unchanged. Reemployment of an Employee After a Break In Service and Before the Entry Date. For any Plan Year in which the eligibility requirements in Section 2.1 are based on Years of Service, if an Employee Terminates Employment with the Employer either prior to or after satisfying the eligibility requirements in Section 2.1 (but before the Employee's Entry Date in Section 2.1) and the Employee is subsequently reemployed by the Employer after incurring a Break in Service, then the Employee's Years of Service that were completed prior to the Break in Service will be recognized. Reemployment of a Participant After a Break In Service. For any Plan Year in which the eligibility requirements under Section 2.1 are based on Years of Service, if an Employee (1) was a Participant in the Plan, (2) Terminates Employment with the Employer, and (3) is subsequently reemployed by the Employer after incurring a Break in Service, then the Employee's Year(s) of Service that were completed prior to the Break in Service will be recognized. Ignoring Service for Eligibility If Service Requirement for Eligibility Is More Than 1 Year of Service. Notwithstanding anything in the Plan to the contrary, if this Plan (or a component of the Plan) provides at any time that an Employee must complete more than one (1) Year of Service for eligibility purposes, and such Employee will have a 100% Vested Interest in the Participant's Account (or the sub-Account that relates to such component) upon becoming a Participant in the Plan, then with respect to an Employee who incurs a Break in Service before satisfying such eligibility requirement (1) the Employee's Year(s) of Service (and Hours of Service) that were completed prior to the Employee's Break(s) in Service will not be counted for eligibility purposes, and (2) the Employee's Eligibility Computation Period will commence on the Employee's Reemployment Commencement Date and subsequent Eligibility Computation Periods will be based upon the provisions of the definition of Eligibility Computation Period (with the Reemployment Commencement Date substituted for the Employment Commencement Date, if applicable).

I suggest to read the plan document sections about the computation periods. It may specify that you re-start a computation period to be 12 month of employment upon rehiring only if a participant incurred 1-Year Break in Service. And if it is silent, I may still base my decision on the 1-Year Break in Service rule described in the plan document, i.e. if a participant incurred 1-Year Break in Service, treat him as a new employee for eligibility purposes.

I agree with ESOP Guy in general - but for this specifically - it would be unusual to have a true plan merger of a DB plan and a 401(k) plan, where the participants have no choice, and pension provisions are preserved. I understand there are some hybrid DB/k plans out there, but they aren't common (and I don't know anything about them) and it doesn't sound like that's what you have based on describing it as a rollover. But it is still good to consider ESOP Guy's point in case it for some reason it is a plan merger.

From the Instructions to Form 1099-R (emphasis added). It's pretty straightforward, a 1099-R is required, even for rollovers. There is no exception for plans that happen to be sponsored by the same employer. That actually happens fairly regularly. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1099r.pdf "Direct Rollovers You must report a direct rollover of an eligible rollover distribution. A direct rollover is the direct payment of the distribution from a qualified plan, a section 403(b) plan, or a governmental section 457(b) plan to a traditional IRA, Roth IRA, or other eligible retirement plan." As for how to correct it, and penalties - I would suggest reading the General Instructions. The Penalties portion starts on page 18. Looks like the penalty might be $110 if filed before August 1st? Assuming there is no exception? I would suggest filing now, and see if the IRS sends a notice. Since it sounds like a non-taxable rollover, there should be no other tax impact. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1099gi.pdf

It depends on how the money was moved to determine if a 1099-R is needed. If it was a trustee imitated transfer of the assets and the participant had no choice there doesn't need to be a 1099-R. This would be some kind of plan merger. I get in this case the trustee and participant are the same but how the paperwork matters. If this was done in a way there was no option to roll the money over to an IRA or take the money and pay taxes than there doesn't need to be a 1099-R. If they had the husband and wife complete a distribution form that gave them the option (even if it was never going to be taken) to roll the money to an IRA or take it and pay taxes there needed to be a 1099-R. This would be a distribution with a rollover to the new plan. The only way you can know for sure is if you see some of the paperwork that authorized the movement of the money. Was the payment some kind of plan merger (no 1099-R) or a distribution with a rollover (yes to the 1099-R) is the question you need answered.

It depends specifically on what you hired the attorney for. If you hired the attorney to process paperwork only, then pro se makes sense. If you hired the attorney to represent you in court for this matter, then pro se doesn't make sense. Did your attorney review the order and give you advice? or just file it for you? If your agreement with them is that they are to review the order and answer any questions from the other party, and represent you, then typically their name would be listed. Who drafted the order? If the other party doesn't know you have an attorney representing you then they would not know to include their information.

Thanks for your help. I really appreciate it!

He would need to take his MRD from the IRA for 2019 before rolling the balance in to the Plan. Once rolled into the Plan he would fall under the 401(a)(9) rules for the plan so if he is not a 5% owner and continues to be employed he would not need to take an MRD from the Plan until he separates service. When he separates he would have a MRD for the year he separates due no later than April 1 of the year following separation.

I will second Lou S. No age limit for in-plan Roth rollovers.

I am not aware of any age restrictions in the code or regs that would prohibit it. Assuming \document allows for after tax and you don't have testing issues. If you did it properly you might be able to make the after tax contributions, do in plan roth conversion, then roll out newly convereted Roth piece to ROTH-IRA before end of year and avoid RMDs enitirely on them as well. essentially doing an end run around around both the ROTH IRA age limit and ROTH IRA dollar limit.

74 is NOT elderly.