In early 2011, the client contributed to the Plan a $15,000 Safe Harbor contribution for 2010. The client took a $15,000 deduction on the 2010 Subchapter S tax return, which was filed by the 3/15/11 due date. In our contribution calculations for the 2010 plan year, we also calculated a 2010 profit sharing contribution of $11,000 (based on 2010 employees' compensation amounts). The client then made the 2010 profit sharing contribution of $11,000 on 4/4/11. The client understands he cannot deduct this $11,000 on the 2010 tax return, since it was already filed. However, I would like to confirm that the client can deduct the $11,000 on the 2011 tax return, as long as the total contribution deduction for 2011 does not exceed 25% of 2011 compensation.

Either I am missing something very obvious or I've discovered a new unsolveable math problem.....I'm pretty certain I know which statement is true. Helping my son with some middle school math and came across this simple one:

Solve for x:

3(4x-2) = 12x

start by multipling whats in the parenthesis by 3

12x - 6 = 12x

then subtract 12x from each side

-6 = 0x

You see the problem: Can't divide by zero by zero to get x by itself.

I can't remember if these type of problems are common in algebra but my recollection is that you should be able to solve for x in any simple algebra problem. Plus I doubt that Holt Pre-Algebra wanted to spring an undefined answer on the students (and their parents).

Any thoughts?

A relative retired a couple years ago and elected a monthly annuity form of distribution from his company's defined benefit plan, which has already commenced payment. That plan now is terminating. The relative received a communication telling him he would receive a reduced lump-sum payment from the plan instead of the annuity benefit that he has been receiving. Must he accept this reduced lump-sum payment? Shouldn't the plan instead use the requisite assets to purchase an annuity product in order to continue the monthly annuity payment as elected?

Is it possible to receive a reimbursement for a future expense if the money is required to be paid before the service can be rendered?

I have dental work that needs to be done. The dentist is requiring that I bring money to the appointment. Is this an eligible expense?

We have a 401k plan and last year the money purchase plan merged in. Participants in the MPPP as of 3/31 have a grandfathered nonelective contribution based on years of service. However, the employer announces that if the participant terminates employment and is rehired after 90 days, then the participant is no longer eligible for the grandfathered benefit, and instead gets the current discretionary match under the plan, which is not as generous. I am wondering if this can be written in under the eligibility exclusion provisions of the plan document, so that it is an eligibility provision. Would it then just be a matter of 410(b) coverage testing each year?

Does anyone have any thoughts?

Company A owns 50% of each of 3 companies, B, C & D.

The other 50% of B, C, and D are owned in exactly the same percentages by 4 other entirely unrelated companies that are each diversified (they have no large individual owners).

B, C and D thus have the same exact ownership structure; however, are they a controlled group?

I can't see a parent/sub because there's no 80% control. Although it seems illogical, I can't get to a brother/sister either because even if I look through the corporations owning B, C & D, there are no common owners with A and no single owners large enough to get me to the appropriate 80/50 threshold.

Am I missing something? Any input greatly appreciated!

I have an employee who finalized a divorce in March and switched from Family HDHP to Individual HDHP. What would the federal limit on contributions be in his case? Would it be a prorated portion of the family limit?

I don't think this is a cross testing question, but it is a non-discrimination question. First six months of plan year, the allocation formula was flat dollar amount (all eligible participants receive same dollar amount), sencond six months, the allocaiton formula was amended to a flat % of pay allocation (all participants receive the same % of pay). Does this fall under the safe harbor exemption?? Or does it need to be tested on at the very least and probably the most, a contributions basis?? Thanks.

A non-profit prospect currently has a 401k plan with match and employer base contribution (flat allocation). over 500 participants of which 7 are HCEs. Plan almost always fails ADP, but employer does not want to go Safe Harbor route.

Is it possible to amend the 401k plan to exclude HCEs and set up a new 403b plan that excludes all except HCEs?? the new 403b plan would have the same match and base as the 401k plan. Would this solve the ADP failure and be legit from a coverage test standpoint??

All thoughts are greatly appreciated.

I need to file a VCP application ... and I need some help.

The HEART ACT amendment was signed by sponsor after 12/31/10, and then mailed to document provider. This error needs to be corrected.

Last month several of you, at BenefitLink, directed me to Rev Procedure 2008-50 .... Thanks!

Now I need more help.

I realize that the HEART amendment was an interim amendment and that I need to complete Appendix F (Streamlined VCP Submission).

I also realize that I am supposed to file either Schedule 1 or Schedule 2. (My problem is I can't figure out which Schedule to file).

The last digit of the employer's EIN is " 3 ". The employer's tax year end is December 31.

I am unable to understand the definition of "remedial amendment period (RAP)", but I understand that RAP is the key to my following question.

Thanks

Should I file Schedule 1 ... or Should I file Schedule 2 ?

I would appreciate your help. Should Sch 1 be filed, or should Sch 2 be filed ?

I am working on a plan that wants to exclude only "floor installers" from their plan. They work full time and are not in a union; is this ok to exclude?

Are different vesting schedules required to be tested as a benefits, rights and feature?

I assume yes, unless the different schedules each meet the safe harbor requirements.

I have 3 plans within a controlled group:

1.) Immediate Vesting - mainly HCE's

2.) Graded, 1-4 years (25% per year) - mainly NHCE's

3.) Graded, 2-6 years (20% per year) - mainly NHCE's

I'm guessing the above setup doesn't look too good regarding nondiscrimination testing?

If Group 1 switched to a 3-year cliff, then they'd be all set, correct? (Since Group 1 and 3 would then have safe harbor schedules, and Group 2 is better than safe harbor but mostly NHCE).

Hello:

Can someone remind me what drives the the degree to which a DC plan can service-weight its contribution schedule? How about a 401(k) match that is tiered by service category? Ultimately, is it simply a 401(a)(4) / cross test issue that must be tested or is there a 411 restriction as well? Any safe harbors?

Thanks.

Kudos to the EA Meeting Committee for (a) sending the attendance certificate via email and (b) linking meeting handouts online at http://www.enrolledactuaries.org/ea2011/me..._materials.html

We are small company trying to select a start up 401k plan. We have narrowed it down to two candidates Country Financial and OneAmerica. Last minute we have noticed that OneAmerica is setup as Group Variable Unity account were the entire company funds are aggregated from investments are made in a wide selection of leading mutual funds from different industry leading companies. Is that a bad thing the way it is setup in a Group Variable Annuity? Just the name Variable Annuity is raising issues like Surrender Fee or M&E fees. We have not seen any of those fees in their proposal. We want to be careful and do not want to get stuck in to a bad situation. One America is cheaper once our assets gets above $1M.

Any advice or experience with the two companies 401k will be greatly helpful.

Thanks.

Are there any good resources with guidance on preparing the multiemployer plan summary?

Thanks

The consumer price indexed was released today (CPI-U) and the value was 223.467

If this value stays the same (or increases) through Sept, then under the regulations next year the deferral limit will be 17,000

comp limt 250,000 and 415 limit 50,000

so, unless we bottom out like we did mid-year of 2008 all signs point to an increase in the limits next year.

If a trust terminates, how does a trustee of the trust distribute the assets. Can the executor move the trust name over to her sole individual name *( under her SSN) What documents are needed if this can be done

I believe if a plan exceeds 415 the sponsor is required to move the excess to a forfeiture/holding account for future use. What if the plan is a one participant plan and no future contributions are going to be made and the sponsor wants to terminate? The plan exceeded 415 for multiple plan years starting in 2003 and ending in 2006. Would an effective remedy be to amend the tax returns, distribute the excess plus allocable yield, and file VCP? Total excess is $12000.

Self employed individual. Trying to figure out if it makes sense to load up the profit sharing before doing any 401k (forget about the year-end election thing for the time being). Are the two treated any differently for payroll taxes? My belief is no, they are not. I know the owner gets no deduction for the 401k, and I don't believe they get a deduction for the profit sharing.

Since it is very connected, I will say that I've always been bothered by the fact that they don't get to deduct their SE income for profit sharing because I believe that puts corporations at an advantage over self employed peple (i.e., S-Corop owners do not pay payroll taxes on the amount of their profit sharing.

Any thoughts?