View the full text of this job opportunity

Just looking for some clarification and confirmation...

The Roth catchup requirement rule is that if you earned $150K of W2 income the previous year then your catchup deferrals must be Roth deferrals.    Is there something that I can show a CPA clarifying reported K1 income?  I googled and found someone saying the rule points strictly to W2 income..

Thanks

View the full text of this job opportunity

View the full text of this job opportunity

View the full text of this job opportunity

I've filed the 5500-EZ for my Solo401k for tax years 2021 (once it hit $250k) through 2025. I just noticed that the effective original date is 1/1/18, but I've been putting 1/1/19 on all the 5500-EZ forms from 2021 to 2025.

Now, I'm considering opening up a Mega Backdoor Roth, and MySolo401k.net has to restate the Solo401k plan and needs the original effective date (I called E-Trade to ask and that's how I noticed the discrepancy).

I've read horror stories on here about people amending their 5500-EZ forms that have been filed on time/yearly and being slapped (it seems automatically?) with late penalties of $150,000 per year, such as here: 

1. What do I do? Let sleeping dogs lie and continue putting the 1/1/19 date on the yearly 5500-EZ forms moving forward? If I put 1/1/18 on the 5500-EZ form for next year, will that trigger some kind of alert on the IRS' end with the associated $150,000 yearly penalties?

2. Do I need to amend every 5500-EZ from 2021 through 2025?

3. Does the plan restatement by Solo401k.net get sent to the IRS in any way or just to E-trade?

Appreciate tips/advice! Thanks!

What are the issues if plan eligibility requirements are liberalized to accommodate a family member and then switched back at a later point in time? 

Patrick Tool LLC employer is participating in Business 401(k) Plan (MEP plan) effective 01/01/2023. During mid of 2025, Patrick Tool LLC decided to establish new plan and spin off from Business 401(k) Plan and completed the participants cessation on 31/07/2025 and establish new plan as Patrick Tool 401(k) Plan as effective date of 08/01/2025. The first return, it will be short plan year. 

For the compliance testing whether we required to do two separate testing for two period like 01/01/2025 to 07/31/2025 and 08/01/2025 to 12/31/2025.

Since the employer is same whether we have to aggregate both the period data and required to do compliance testing for full plan year under Patrick Tool 401(k) Plan. Even though the plan effective is mid of the plan year, we have to complete the testing based on full year compensation and contribution or else based on the short plan year.

Can the employer amend the plan to add Roth if the 403b plan is structured as not subject to ERISA under the limited involvement safe harbor regulation 2510-3-2(f)? If Roth is not added, then any high earner over the FICA limit cannot do catch-ups. Due to this SECURE 2.0 requirement, I would think adding Roth could be permitted. Any thoughts?

I am always second guessing myself.  A 62 YO who is still working wants to roll some of his plan money into an IRA. 

He is older than age 59-1/2. 

Plan is designed with 59-1/2 as the normal retirement age.

No problem here ... right?

Previously we had been using the rates from the Funding Table 2A (Post-ARP/ILJA 25-year segment rates) for our calculations.  This year it was:

Tier 1 - 4.75
Tier 2 - 4.81
Tier 3 - 5.50

However, I believe those rates are no more (or maybe I'm wrong).  What are we supposed to use in their place?

Thanks in advance!

View the full text of this job opportunity

Joe Smith is a dynamic guy and formed a corporation 40 years ago that acquires and manages apartment buildings. He is the 100% shareholder. They now have over 60 apartment buildings. They collect the rents, pay expenses etc. The corporation has about 50 full time employees.  The corporation (GLP, Inc.) has sponsored a 401(k) plan for about 25 years. Every year they make a 12% of salary contribution to all eligible employees and have for many years.

Joe is also quite the artist and has over 100 sculptures and other pieces of art. To show his art he bought a large 7,000 square foot house and formed a Tax Exempt entity called HSB that owns the property and employs 12 full time employees. It is very popular and gives 3 tours a day 5 days a week. Joe wanted HSB to sponsor the same type of 401(k) plan that GLP has for years. So a 401(k) plan with the same provisions was adopted for HSB 10 years ago and continues today.

I would think GLP and HSB would be related entities as Joe Smith owns 100% of GLP and has control of governance of HSB.

Question: Sometimes employees of GLP become employees of HSB and vice versa. If both entities are considered related, must former employees of GLP be provided full benefit elections if they are right away hired by HSB? Or can their GLP plan benefits simply be transferred to the HSB plan if both entities are considered related? 

Thanks.

Participant requests hardship withdrawal from 401k plan.  No question that request meets requirements for valid hardship withdrawal.  After check is issued participant changes his mind.  He has not received the check and has not cashed it.  Plan sponsor asked administrator to cancel the check and return funds to the plan.  Administrator says "okay - no problem" just need you to sign a hold harmless agreement.  In preliminary research I came across old posts here referencing informal IRS guidance that once the check is issued, the hardship withdrawal cannot be rescinded (based on the constructive receipt doctrine) and the funds may not be returned to the plan (because return of hardship withdrawal funds is not an eligible rollover into the plan)  Can anyone provide a cite or location of this informal guidance or other authority for telling the administrator they are wrong and the funds cannot be put back in the plan?

The plan excludes Union employees for the employer contribution including safe harbor. The plan is opted for safe harbor non elective and HCEs are excluded for the SH Non Elective. The plan has totally 4 HCEs (2 union and 2 non union employees) and 2 NHCEs and both are Union employees. 

None of the employees received the SHNE contribution. Whether the plan is subjected to ADP for union employees and ADP ACP for non union employees if the additional employer match is allocated.

My understanding is the plan is deemed to pass since the exclusion is not discriminate in nature against NHCEs and both of them are not received the contribution. Is there any other opinion on this.

View the full text of this job opportunity

View the full text of this job opportunity

How valuable do you find tax advisory services as an employee benefit? We're considering introducing a perk that allows employees direct access to a CPA for their personal tax queries and end-of-year filing support, all managed through a familiar platform like Slack/teams/inbox.

I'm particularly interested in insights from those in HR or who manage employee benefits. Have you implemented similar financial wellness programs? What were your experiences and what feedback did you receive from the team?

View the full text of this job opportunity

The vesting for all existing participants in a profit sharing plan was increased to 100% because it has been many years since the last contribution was made.  The plan hasn't been terminated because the trustee is always optimistic that one day he'll be able to contribute.  My question is, must all new participants also be shown as being 100% vested, or should this happen only after they've been in the plan a few years if no contributions are made (the plan has a 2/20 vesting schedule)?  The document is silent on this.  Thanks in advance for any help.