Leaderboard

As of right now, it looks like the article is running under the title "America’s Booming Solo Workers Embrace $72,000 Tax Shelter" Besides Form 5500, possible pain points include: Capturing any non-owner employees who are required to be covered (including long-term part-time employees) Analysis of related employers which could result in a controlled group or affiliated service group With respect to an unincorporated business, calculation of net earned income, both for purposes of limiting contributions to 100% of compensation and deduction of employer contributions to 25% of compensation Applying limitations on distributions Applying mandatory tax withholding on distributions Reporting distributions on Form 1099-R Applying a plan's loan provisions

I do not think you can formally state two groups, those employed 2/15/PY+1 and those not, because a person's grouping is not determinable by PYE. Draw a parallel to changing an HCE top-paid group election after PYE, where the result changes a person's status under the plan, which is impermissible. Using individual allocation groups in the document but in practice determining two allocation groups by your desired methodology is the best way to accomplish what they want IMHO and I think that of most others. If said 2/15 fell on a weekend or holiday and/or for whatever reason the plan sponsor wanted to accelerate or delay that date, individual groups compared to hardcoding, even if such was permissible, makes administration accommodating. Just because the document allows for flexibility doesn't mean it needs to be used. Finally, you mention a parent and a lot of subsidiaries all with their own plans with separate RKs and independent testing. Is no one concerned about testing in consideration of the control group?

As a former TPA I will tell you these are generally not great clients. I dont mean in the sense that they are jerks or that they don't pay their bills. I mean they are so "unusual" from an operational perspective that only a partner can assist and answer their questions. There is no detailed work ti be done, so not much that a staff person can do. So if you bring on one of those clients, it's basically 100% partner time which starts to raise the quesiton of "can you charge enough money." I used to tell clients, "it's not worth it for you to pay me what I need to get paid to do this work for you, but I cant do it for any less. If you want me to be available to you when you call, I need a decent fee." I would review the plans all the time throughout the year for, amendments needed, invoicing, collections, you name it. Just having a plan on the books takes time even if I'm not doing any work. I used to charge $1,250 a year and I still think it wasn't enough sometimes.

As stated already, I think the majority of "solo 401ks" are created without a TPA, but via a financial advisor or CPA. Only after issues arise, all those already mentioned, does a TPA/Attorney get involved. Recently, I had one referred by a CPA where his client thought he had a SEP not a 401k plan, for over 15 years. Another was set up without anyone asking the ownership/controlled group question. I think these plans are more likely to have alternative investments which can bring more unknown complications. They seem simple to market and run, until they are not.

In addition to the issues mentioned by @C. B. Zeller, (the control group / affiliated service group / related employer group issue is so common!) some what I see: Disregard for deposit timing, both for deferrals, and Over contributions thinking it can count towards a future year even though the deposit occurs this year. - think throwing in an extra $100,000 because they have the cash available and want it to grow As well as disregard for limits, such as depositing up to what they think is the maximum, even though the W-2 compensation they have paid themselves(or a covered spouse) is substantially lower. Investments in unusual assets with no additional compliance such as an independent appraisal for valuation Assets/accounts titled to the business rather than the plan name when they were intended to be for the plan Starting more than one plan every time they get a new account or advisor. Or thinking they have more than one plan when really a new doc with a new account might be a restatement of the older document, but they don't realize it Compensation not being eligible - thinking that profit and loss is enough, and not having earned income, but still making contributions Failure to make any contributions - for 5, 10+ years(sometimes nothing beyond the first year) at that point the plan isn't really a plan and should be terminated and closed

I have heard of consequences from not filing a Final 5500. The two partners rolled their plan accounts to IRAs and thought that was that. Five or so years later, the IRS said your money purchase plan is still on-going. Where is your latest restatement and 5500 filing? I don't know what it cost to untangle the mess.

You will report credits earned in each year 2023, 2024 and 2025. It helps to see what the form looked like (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8554.pdf) to see what information is required, but renewals are easier using pay.gov. The place to start is here: https://www.irs.gov/tax-professionals/enrolled-agents/maintain-your-enrolled-agent-status Here is a fairly detailed description of the renewal process: https://accountably.com/irs-forms/f8554ep/ (my including this here is not an endorsement of their service). I agree the calendar-year dates for earning credits tied to off-calendar-year dates for the renewal application period and a different off-calendar-year dates for the expiration of the renewal makes it seem more complicated than it needs to be, but in our business most things that are tied to off-calendar-year dates seem more complicated than they need to be.

I will say, while most advisors will just use the plan documents provided by a custodian (Altruist/Charles Schwab) without even reading them, there is a growing group, especially in XYPN, that will typically bring in providers like mysolo401k. But I mostly see advisors using the custodian's plan docs, and the advisor takes on a pseudo admin role without having the knowledge to step into those shoes.

Could not agree more. However, I believe we are going to see more issues as AI becomes more prevalent with the "do-it-yourselfers". We've referred a handful of cases over the past several months to ERISA Attorney's for correction of a host of issues when the "do-it-yourselfer", or their other "professional advisor", realizes there is an issue.

Not that more is needed, I often come across plan documents not being up to date, no Cycle 3, sometimes no Cycle 2. I often find these are set-up without a TPA, generally with an investment advisor and accountant.

Okay, the idea here is that she wants to get to her DC annual additions maximum, which will likely exceed the sum of the deferral max and then the 6% DC allocation. So she does the rest as employee after-tax. as having no employees means the ACP test is passed. As for the backdoor part of the Roth, that's just a Roth conversion of some/any of the total, including the employee after-tax, so that she's basically gotten the full DC max and it's all/some become part of a Roth account within the plan.

Many practitioners are overly generous. A fee should include not only the work but also something for availability. Whether that’s through an explicit fee for availability or, when there is work, a task-based fee or a time-based fee priced with a margin for availability might turn on one’s profession’s rules.

In 2023, I received the renewal due by January 31st email and submitted my application in January as instructed. They came back with a reply that I submitted too early and would need to resubmit after April 1, and pay again too. So don't do it early!

Are they asking you to renew as an EA, or as an ERPA? That intro you pasted here doesn't say enrolled retirement plan agent

Many of these one-participant plans have < $250k of assets and don't need to file 5500-EZ while operating. Still, a Final 5500-EZ is required when the plan closes, and this is often missed. I've never heard of consequences from not filing a Final 5500-EZ but maybe a future IRS/DOL will datamine that filing miss to generate revenue.

Hi David, good point on the earnings. Thank you

One additional step the client may want to do is immediately on making the After Tax Contribution, convert it to Roth so that there is no tax on the earnings. It also might be good reinforcement to tell the client although you contributed $180,000 in this example, only report and deduct $100,000 on the 1040.

Speaking of thinking, Peter - that's a great thought of yours there that *any* late deposit brings questions of 401(a)(2). Why look for more obscure references of what's gone wrong, when "page one of the 400s" has it right there for you? 🤔 (unless one suggests the undeposited amounts aren't yet plan assets to divert anywhere else)

Agreed, Peter - It's the prohibited transaction rules (the business holding onto what should be plan money) that make important the deferral deposit timing in non-Title I plans.

All correct. No requirement on the 6%. (After all, any company can have employees make after-tax contributions independent of employer contributions.)

Peter, just because the document says everyone is in their own group, it’s incredibly rare to actually have to test more than a handful of groups. For example, everyone that is employed on the February date would likely be in the same group for testing. The plan definition just provides flexibility on how they are grouped.

Hiya Peter! Thanks for all you do for this community, I appreciate the way you step up to make sure correct information gets out there and questions get answered. There are lots of other folks on this board that have also shared their deep experience, and perhaps they can weigh in here: In all the years I've been using the General Test for Non-discrimination (Cross testing), I've developed a "wait and see" attitude. I have been surprised many times when the math doesn't work. One really knows nothing until the tests are performed. I would advise a Plan Sponsor against jumping to conclusions about the likelihood of passing the tests. I have also been surprised when a Plan passes testing when at first glance I thought that it never would.

This amount should just be earnings that goes into the participant's account. These lost earnings are technically interest paid on a loan the employer is considered to have taken from the participant's account during the period of time the loan payment was being held by the employer before being sent to the trust. The participant did not pay this interest, the employer did. It is considered like the employer took a separate loan from the participant's account and must pay interest on that separate loan. It is the earnings that were lost (should have been earned in the participant's account( because the payment of the loan repayment was not sent to the trust on time Accordingly, the payment of these lost earnings should not affect the amortization schedule of the original loan. Again, due to it being an untimely deposit of the loan payment, it is not an amount owed by the participant on the participant's loan but an amount owed to the participant by the employer due to its prohibited transaction loan. Make sense?

I have made the (not all all difficult) decision to retire at the end of this year. I have agreed to work a couple of days a week during the early part of next year to help out my employer while they hire a replacement, but it's a limited engagement. I'll be lurking on these boards for a while yet. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Dave and Lois for providing this magnificent resource - it has been a tremendous asset! I'd also like to thank all of you folks, past and present, for the invaluable assistance you have given to me over the years. I've certainly taken more than I've given, and your time, generosity, and expertise is appreciated more than you can ever know. It's not just the technical expertise, but the sounding board for discussions, sometimes griping (misery loves company) and humor in the face of statutory and regulatory foolishness that makes this such a great community. I wish you all the best in your future endeavors (I'm trying hard not to gloat) as you continue in this business, and I hope you all have a great Holiday season! Take care, and again, a heartfelt thanks!!!

Congratulations on planning ahead for your retirement. If successful you'll have to adjust to being the boss of nothing and it won't take long for you to really enjoy it! We sold in 2016 for 1x - paid 1/2 at closing (12/30) and 1/2 the next year. The price was firm - no adjustments. You might want to check with business brokers who specialize in TPA transactions for a reality check on your multiple. Tax-planning is really important in structuring the terms so you get to keep as much of the proceeds as possible - you've sacrificed 30 years for it! Any income or expenses after the closing date belonged to the buyer. We did not try and game it by trying to accelerate collections or delay payables. Aside from getting paid, our biggest concern was the continued employment of our dedicated team and 9 years out everyone's still there. I'd cast your net wider than the single shop you know. We talked to about 7 shops - narrowed it down to 4 friendly competitors and then picked the best fit. Our terms weren't negotiable. If you want to discuss in depth, just PM me.