My question is......Do Not for profit Government

entities such as a county or city government pay this fee??? County and or City Governments do not file....a Form 720, the Quarterly Federal Excise Tax Return

Paying Fee and Reporting Requirements

Insurance carriers and plan sponsors must file a Form 720, the Quarterly Federal Excise Tax Return, to report and pay the annual CER fees.

Hello,

I have a first year plan that started in 2012.

A profit sharing 401(k) plan fails the ADP test and the key employee must return $9,000 of deferrals.

When the plan is tested for top-heavy status as of 12/31/2012, taking into consideration the key employee's total salary deferrals, the plan is top heavy.

When the plan is tested for top-heavy status as of 12/31/2012, taking into consideration the key employee's salary deferrals reduced by the $9,000, the plan is not top heavy.

Can the top heavy test be based on the key employee's salary deferrals reduced to pass the ADP test?

Thank you

sue

In 2014 my household income is between 100% and 400% FPL

I know that if my employer offers me affordable self-only coverage and offers to cover my dependents and spouse (if I pay the entire additional premium) none of us can get a premium tax credit (subsidy) from the health insurance "marketplace"

But what if my employer does NOT offer to cover my dependents or spouse in 2014 (I know they will be coerced to offer dependent coverage in 2015), can my spouse and kids then get a marketplace subsidy?

I would think so but need reassurance from an expert.

Thanks

Company A, with a 401(k) plan, is about to acquire Company B, with a SIMPLE. I know that a company is not permitted to have both type plans in the same year. Is there some special rule in an acquisition situation where they were not related for the part of the year when both plans existed?

I have heard from multiple clients that they are being informed that grandfathered plans will have to comply with PPACA's no cost-sharing preventive care requirement starting 1/1/2014.

I am generally confident that is NOT the case and that grandfathered plans can theoretically keep that status indefinitely and therefore need not comply with this preventive care mandate.

Because I have heard this from more than a few clients, I do wonder if there is something that I am missing.

Can anyone help?

ok - I know this should be pretty basic, but am wondering what others think.

Since the 5500 SF form for 2012 has the signature on the first page now (yay) are you only attaching that page as the "manually signed 5500 attachment" for EFAST?

It seems logical to me that would be the case, but being in this industry over 20 years I have learned that logic does not always rule.

I couldn't find "current" 2012 form instructions on point on the EBSA website. The FAQs explanation is still the old one that says to scan and attached the first 2 pages.

The whole thing about attaching the first 2 pages always threw me but I rationalized that perhaps that was because the SF was signed on page 2. The 5500 has been a page 1 signature for as long as I can remember, though....SIGH

A calendar year 2013 plan will have a gain base for the current plan year if the employer elects to apply any of the 1/1/13 PFB to the 2013 funding requirement. The plan also has about $60,000 of COB at 1/1/13. The itch is that if no PFB is applied, the gain base won't be set up because the funded status will be 100% if assets are not reduced by PFB and the funding requirement is about $80,000. If PFB is applied then the funded status drops below 100% and the gain base gets set up and the funding requirement becomes $40,000.

Can the employer elect to apply all of the COB plus $1 of PFB so the result is the lower funding requirement? And is there any consequence of electing to apply credit balance in an amount in excess of the funding requirement?

Thanks for any and all responses.

Late deferrals for 2012 -- the amount involved was $56 and tax was $8. The deferrals were deposited by the end of the 2012 but lost earnings were not deposited until 2013.

On Form 5330 part I, line 3b, is an additional $56 tax due in addition to the $8? Is this applicable to the 2012 and/or 2013 filing?

We have client that overlooked payroll deduction of loan payments since 2011. We just discovered this with data rec'd for 2012 plan year. Technically, default occurred in 2011, but was only discovered this past month. We have calculated default (Princ + accrued interest), and participant wants to refinance loan for 5 year term as there are only 5 pay periods remaining on original term.

Q1) Any concerns with us writing 2nd loan for 5 year term to refinance default?

Q2) Watching a webcast from ASCi on EPCRS, an example presented of using VCP was "you want to not recognize a loan default in the year of default but actually in the year of correction." Does this mean we cannot just self-correct (SCP) but have to submit under VCP?

The ESOP statute requires an ESOP of a private companies to hold the Common Stock of the company with the best voting power and dividend rights.

Can a private company have an ESOP that holds Common Stock with the best voting power and dividend rights and also have preferred stock with better voting power and/or dividend rights than the Common Stock held by the ESOP?

Any cites to official or unoffical guidance are greatly appreciated.

Any comments are appreciated.

1) Participant took a loan from 401k plan 10 years ago, but plan did not allow for loans at that time (plan does allow for loans now). The participant has been making repayments the whole time.

** Since discovered now (2013), does the original loan amount (plus loan interest) become taxable to the participant in 2013 and considered a deemed distribution?

** Should the participant continue to repay the loan and if so, how is the repayment amount classified if the entire loan amount is taxable in 2013?

** Is this an VCP fixable violation?

** The loan repayments were established with a baloon payment, which is wrong. But since the loan should not have been allowed in the first place, what impact is there?

2) [Different participant, same plan] After a loan policy was adopted, the participant has taken 3 loans, all of which are still outstanding. Loan policy allows for only 1 loan at a time. All loan payments are current.

** Are the second and third loans an operation failure, considered to be deemed distribution and taxable now in 2013?

** Fixable through VCP?

Thanks

58 year old retired participant was receiving monthly pension payments. Then he accepts pension buyout lump-sum and rolls it to his IRA. CPA says he must do a 72(t) subequal on his IRA until attaining age 59 1/2 to avoid the 10% premature distirbution penalty on the prior pension distributions. Correct?

BACKGROUND:

We have a client (Co. A) with a 401(k) . A few years after the plan originated, Co. A purchased part ownership of another company (Co. B). Both are restaurants. Ownership interests in Co. B have changed several times in the past few years, but at all times prior to 2012, Co. A owned no more than 40% of Co. B so there was not a controlled group.

Effective 01/01/12, Co. A bought out other owners and became sole owner of Co. B, so effective January, 2012 we are dealing with a controlled group; however the employees continued on Co. B's payroll through April, 2012. Co. B never adopted Co. A's plan and although we haven't finished final testing for 2012, for argument's sake, let's assume the plan passes 410(b) even with everyone form Co. B excluded.

Co. B was then dissolved and all employees transferred to Co. A. effective 04/01/12 with a hire date of 04/01/12

QUESTIONS RE 401(k) PLAN:

1) Does Co. A have to give former Co. B employees eligibility credit for past service or can they consider them all hired on 04/01/12?

2) Does the answer to 1) above change if the employer instead recognized Co. B employees' original hire dates and seniority for other benefits?

3) If we have to give credit for prior service, some of the former Co. B employees would have entered the plan in 2012, but were never offered the opportunity to defer (since Co. A treated hire date as 04/01/12). How do we resolve this? (it's a large plan and many don't defer; although both HCE & NHCE ADP rates are less than 1%, some individual rates are as high as 10%)

So client purchased real estate had account at brokerage asked to send money for payment told 10 days he needed sooner, so he took money from corp account got payment from brokerage and put that into corp to replace payment corp made on behalf of plan. IRS says no good since thats a reversion I said reimbursement not reversion help or is he sunk?

Say a participant takes maximum loan of 50% of their vested balance. A few months later, they request an in-service withdrawal having met the plan's age 59 1/2 requirement. The investment provider is limiting the participant's withdrawal amount such that their remaining balance after the withdrawal is still equal to the remaining outstanding loan balance, stating the participant must maintain the collateral on the existing loan balance. We do not agree with this. The 50% limit should only apply the day the loan is originally requested. A participant should be able to take an in-service withdrawal assuming they have met the plan requirements in any amount that they want, regardless of their current loan balance. Does anyone agree/disagree?

Any thoughts on the following situation would be much appreciated. I'm getting a headache.

1/1/2009 participant takes out general purpose loan, term 5 years.

1/1/2010 participant refinances this loan as a principal residence loan, term 10 years.

5/1/2013 participant requests to refinance this loan again, for a new principal residence. Additional principal will be borrowed. The 10 year maturity date from the first refinance will be retained.

Some additional facts:

Vested account balance including all outstanding loan balances = $80,000

Outstanding loan balance immediately prior to new refinance request = $24,000

Highest outstanding balance in prior 12 months = $26,000

Is this new refinance permissible? I would be a lot more comfortable with it if the original loan hadn't been for a 5 year term.

Dog

Where can I find a 1982 Social Security Covered Compensation Table?

Thanks

Does anyone have a good write-up of what a temporary agency needs to be concerned with in order to comply with ACA? ACA seems to impact them in a wholly unusual manner. Have the "big boys" (Manpower, Kelly) come out with anything about what their intentions are?

If someone processes a request for distribution from their IRA a few days prior to turning age 59 1/2, does that mean there could be a 10% penalty or does the date of receipt of the funds mark the date if not received until after 59 1/2?

Hi all! The answer to this may be black and white and I apologize in advance if it has been asked before (I did my due diligence searching for the answer on here prior to posting)

Basic info: 1 HCE, 13 NHCEs, multiple contrib allocation groups all of which get a contribution (no zeros), last day employment requirement so all terminees didn't get an allocation

Plan passes ABPT but fails 410(b) ratio percentage at 60%. I understand that the plan can pass coverage with ABPT only, given "Reasonable Classification" was utilized in assigning allocation groups. Given the following excerpt, I would say it's okay to skip the 410(b), however one issue is not clear to me: Is giving a zero allocation to terminees due to the last day employment provision of the plan, not make a "Reasonable Classification" thus requiring us to pass the ratio test??

In a question posed in 2001 by the Joint Committee on Employee Benefits of the American Bar Association, the IRS was asked whether it would be acceptable to name each participant as a separate allocation group under a profit sharing plan and have the employer declare a separate discretionary contribution to each participant (with a view toward using cross-testing to prove the employer contribution is nondiscriminatory). The IRS noted that if a 0% allocation were to a participant, it might be interpreted as excluding a participant by name, in which case the plan would have to satisfy the ratio test for this to be acceptable. However for a plan that is relying on the ratio test to pass coverage, but is naming individuals as excluded from the plan, it is advisable to request a determination letter [...]

Thank you.