A question came up as to if a TPA receives Revenue Sharing payments from a mutual fund, should this be reported on line 10e?

It seems clear to me that 10e is only required to be used if the payments are from an insurance company/similar organization, and would normally otherwise be reported on a Schedule A if you were doing a normal 5500 form.

Any disagreement?

If perchance you DID report a revenue sharing payment from a mutual fund on this line, I can't see that it would really cause any problems other than perhaps, at some point, a question. You don't typically see anyone get in trouble for over-disclosing!

It does seem a little odd, in a way, that the SF would require disclosure for payments from an insurance company, yet not require it revenue sharing from a mutual fund...

Who is responsible for the following and what - if any - correction(s) is(are) necessary:

Participant completes 401k Election Form, electing 8% pre-tax withholding.

On the bottom of the participant's 401k Election Form just prior to the participant's signature and date, the form states:

"Duty to Review Pay Records. I understand I have a duty to review my pay records (pay stub, direct deposit receipt, etc.) to confirm the Employer has properly implemented my salary deferral election. Furthermore, I have a duty to inform the Plan Administrator if I discover any discrepancy between my pay records and this Salary Deferral Agreement. I understand the Plan Administrator will treat my failure to report any withholding errors for any payroll to which my Salary Deferral Agreement applies, by the cut off date for the next following payroll, as my affirmative election to defer the amount actually withheld (including zero). However, I thereafter may modify my deferral election prospectively, consistent with the Plan terms."

The participant has not come forward indicating there has been an error in his 401(k) amount being withheld from payroll. There have been 2 payrolls since the election was made/signed/turned in to the Plan.

Does the Plan have to alert the Participant that is has recently discovered the Payroll Company reports reflect $8 per pay (not 8%) being withheld?

If the Plan must alert the Participant, does the employer have to correct the matter:

(a) going forward

(b) going forward only if the Participant confirms he wants his 8% Election put into place

© going forward only if the Participant confirms he wants his 8% Election put into place, with the correction effective with the next plan permitted "election change" date, or,

(d) by (the employer) contributing 50% of the difference between the amounts withheld v. the amount based on election, plus interest?

Are the requirements identical to say a 401(k)?

In 2012 I opened a traditional IRA and a Roth IRA account and contributed $5,000 to each. Unfortunately, I made some bad investments and have lost about 75% in both accounts. I would like to deduct as much of these losses for income tax purposes as I can.

Specifically, I would like to recharacterize the $5,000 traditional IRA contribution as if it had been contributed to the Roth IRA account. I would then withdraw the entire balance of the Roth IRA account prior to April 15th, 2013, thus avoiding any penalty on excess contributions to the Roth account. Then I would deduct the losses as a misc. itemized deduction, subject to the 2% threshold. Any problems with this?

I would also like to make a new $5,000 contribution to the traditional IRA account for 2012, so I can get the above-the-line income tax deduction. Provided this is done after the above-described recharacterization, but prior to April 15, 2013, any problems with this?

thanks in advance!

Did I read it or did I dream it?

I seem to recall that the first day of a plan year had to be an entry date.

I don't remember where I think I got that from.

Maybe it was part of an ASPPA-test-studying hallucination.

If it's true, where can I find that language?

If it's false, feel free to laugh and point...

MPP sponsored by a non-profit and administered by large insurance co. Forms of benefit allowable are annuities and lumpsum. Formula is straight 10% across the board.

Here is the unusual part. If a participant terminates due to disability before NRA they receive a disability annuity credit of 10% of compensation until they reach NRA. Seems like a feature you would normally have in a DB plan.

Are there any issues with making contributions based on past compensation in a DC plan, assuming that is what is going on here? Does it create additional testing issues? Is the employer actually making the addl contribution into the plan and paying them out as disability pension benefits taxable as wages and reportable on 1099-R?

Thanks for any insight!

How does one go about terminating a UK pension? Where to start looking? Employer has closed the business unit and the plan contains only retirees and terminated vested participants.

The NCCMP released their report a few weeks ago. I believe this group has strong support within the industry and Congress. It is worthwhile reading for anyone practicing in the multiemployer arena.

http://www.solutionsnotbailouts.com/

I know that the law allows for several life status changes to open the door for Sect. 125 mid year changes, but I am curious to know what, if any changes are required under a plan. Could an employer effectively write a plan document that does not allow any mid-year elections? Not saying that this is ideal, nor am I trying to do it.....just that I've seen variation in plans where some allow certain events to trigger a permissible mid-year change, while the same events under another plan does not.

Client has 11 employees and utilizes top paid group election.

Top paid election would be 2 (rounding down) which is what the Relius system is showing.

There are three HCEs. One is a greater than 5% owner and the other two are HCEs based on compensation.

Plan uses prior year testing.

My question: The Relius system is showing all three in the top of the ADP Test even though there is a top paid election in plan. Can anyone tell me why this is happening?

I have a client who set up the company's compensation structure to not pay commissions until the client paid the bill associated with the creation of the commission. Makes sense financially, but unfortunately, they didn't make such payments cease at termination of employment. As a result, I have commissions being paid a year after the person has left the company. Obviously, this is being paid more than 2-1/2 months after termination of employment. Is there anything I am forgetting/missing, or do I just ignore these payments altogether and exlude these people from all testing as they have performed NO service in the current year??? If they are paid within 2-1/2 months, but in the next plan year, I am thinking I have a contribution requirement if safe harbor.

I know there are several strings on this topic but I couldnt find one that dealt with this situation exactly, and I always have to review these requirements.

Assume for these purposes the combination of plans is NOT top heavy. The CB Plan has a 1,000 hour accrual requirement for a CB credit. The 401k PSP has a 1,000 hour and last day requirement for profit sharing. The plan is not safe harbor (just deferrals and profit sharing).

Is this correct?

Employee who does not work 1,000 hours but is active on last day of plan year does not need to receive an employer contribution in the 401k PSP.

Employee who does not work 1,000 hours and terminates during the year does not need to receive an employer contribution in the 401k PSP.

Employee who works 1,000 hours and terminates during the year does not need to receive an employer contribution in the 401k PSP.

Now, assume the same things above, except the Plan IS top heavy.

Is this correct?

Employee who does not work 1,000 hours but is active on last day of plan year must receive the TH minimum, and thus the GW.

Employee who does not work 1,000 hours and terminates during the year does not need to receive an employer contribution in the 401k PSP.

Employee who works 1,000 hours and terminates during the year has accrued a DB benefit, thus must receive a TH minimum, and thus must receive a GW.

Speaking only for myself, there is no exercise more worthless than the time spent attempting to place information from unfriendly asset statement(s) into the correct bucket. In fact, the only one who seems to look at and question this stuff is the auditor.

In particular, sometimes determining the the basis/proceeds for realized appreciation can be a nightmare. This is particularly exasperating when during the year the plan sponsor switched investment managers and the basis as of the date of switch is lost or mistracked.

I have typically indicated that I am an actuary and not a trust accountant and that I would accept whatever their auditor comes up with, which sort of thwarts the audit process. How have practitioners proceeded, for example, when they simply cannot identify the cost and proceeds basis?

A plan's AFTAP is less than 80% but more than 60% and therefore subject to 50% restriction on lump sums. An HCE is restricted because the plan fails the 110% test. Which restriciton is applied first? Does the 110% test get performed after bifurcation pursuant to IRC 436 or is the 110% test performed based on the entire lump sum before bifurcation? Thanks.

Hi,

New to filing 5500s for welfare benefit plans. I have a plan that has a Wrap document so I know I only need to file 1 5500 form.

But now, my stupid question, when I get to the questions 5, 6a, 6b and 6c re: participants benefitting under the plan, I have different numbers of participants for health insiurance (175), Dental (208) and Life/LTD (402). How do I figure out which number to use, do I just go with the 402 as that is the largest?

Thansk much for your help.

I have reviewed most of the 401(a)(26) posts here for hce only plans

and usually it is with the hce still working... If the hce is considered retired

is the 401(a0(26) issue dead? in other words can an hce own a business

and run a retiree only plan? In the past it has been said that the IRS typically

did not "approve" of owner reductions in accrued benefits at termination. so is it a viable

option to fund the plan up through the ppa amortization process and then terminate?

The company I work for has a self directed 401k, only a handful of participants left. The original plan documents from the plan provider were pre-approved by the IRS, but again adopted by us as a self-directed 401k plan. The plan did not allow for loans, nor did it allow for in service distributions other than hardship distributions. We are considering amending our plan to allow participants to borrow from the plan, and / or to allow in service rollovers to other qualified plans without incurring taxes or IRS penalties, either to an IRA or a 401k from another employer, prior to 59 1/2 (some of our employees have two jobs, and their other employers have 401k plans).

The question is, can we just amend our plan in writing, mid-year, to allow these options without filing the amendments with the IRS, or do we have to file these amendments with the IRS?

As always, I've valued the responses from this board as the most professional and informed, over the many years, even when the questions are posed from a novice such as myself.

Carl C

We have the following situation:

Company A and B members of a controlled group. Company A adopts a retirement plan and company B joins as adopting employer via a joinder agreement.

Company B is no more part of the controlled group and decides to terminate participation as adopting Employer of Company's A retirement plan.

Since they do not want to sponsor a retirement plan going forward the participant's benefits must be paid out.

Question.:

If there are any "standard" resolutions to execute the above, I could not find them.

I think there must be a company's B resolution to terminate the participation in the company's A retirement plan and distribute the benefits . Also a resolution of company A to approve the cessation of company B as an adopting Employer. Since B will not adopt any other plan, is this enough to justify the distribution of benefits? Or do we need some other corporate resolution(s)?

And in any case, I assume that benefits must be 100% vested.

Thank you for your help

Does anyone know what federal organization, if any, regulates governmental 457b plans? I believe DOL only regulates ERISA plans.

I have a client who would like to make the top-paid group election for 2012. Is it too late? Is this a "discretionary amendment" that has to be adopted before the end of the year in which it is effective? That seems silly, since nondiscrimination testing (in this case ADP/ACP test) is done after the end of the year, and it only after testing is done that we know whether we need to make the election or not. However, I cannot find any guidance to the contrary.