"Dear XXXXXX

Product enhancements and EFAST2 regulations mandated by the IRS have generated a higher than expected call volume. As a result, you may experience a delay of a week or longer before you receive a response from our Relius Government Forms client services team. We apologize for any inconvenience this has caused and assure you that incidents are being answered in the order they are received. "

I

Is there a problem granting 100% vesting when certain employees are hired and they previously worked at certain medical facilities and are now being hired by a certain employer, lets call it an anesthesilogy PA. If HCEs and NHCES of the group being hired are treated the same, there is no discriminatory treatment. But granting this group 100% vesting and immediate eligibility while new hires of the employer have to work 3 years for 100% vesting and one year to be eligible, creates BRF testing does it not?

I appreciate any insights, thanks!

I have a plan that lays off employees during the winter. When the employee comes back we refinance their loan to be sure the finish the loan in the original time period. One participant came back and made a few loan payment but his loan need to be paid up by 6/1. He still has a $500 balance. He needs to pay off in full now or the loan defaults correct? It is a deemed distribution not an offset correct since he has not had a distributable event? This also limits him to not being able to take a new loan in the future right?

Also, I have a plan that stopped making payments on a participants loan b/c the participant could not afford to make the payments anymore. The plan just told us they did this months ago. The loan is in default now. Is this also a deemed distribution since the participant still works there?

When running testing using net comp, if the owner has K-1 income of say $250,000 AFTER all employer/payroll tax deductions, are other people reducing the comp by the $16,500 in deferrals to test consistently?

I'm not sure there is any basis for doing it this way, it just seems like the right thing to do...

First year of Non-profit organization is 2010. There are no owners and three of ten participants are earning more than $110,000 in 2010. Are there any HCEs in 2010 if there was no employer in 2009? Thanks.

FT Williams has a report that indicates whether a 5500 has been accepted and the date.

One plan was accepted the other day, just for the heck I tried the DOL website

(you can enter EIN, plan name or whatever,

http://www.efast.dol.gov/portal/app/dissem...?execution=e1s1

yes indeed, its already out there for full public viewing.

In order for an HCE to take a lump sum from his employer's DB plan, he was required to invest 125% of the distribution amount in a restricted IRA. There is a Security Agreement in place. He invested the assets in a variable annuity. The financial institution is both the owner and the beneficiary of the annuity. The participant is the annuitant. This took place about 3 years ago. Now, we're trying to determine what options are available to him if he wants to get out of this annuity (understanding that the Restricted IRA provisions must remain in effect wherever he invests). Paying the surrender charge will be the first deterrent, but if he decides to bite the bullet, the Security Agreement says that the DB Plan Administrator and the Participant can agree on a successor custodian or trustee and provide the current financial institution with transfer instructions.

The original investment representative is now out of the picture, and the replacement rep doesn't seem to understand what this Restricted IRA is. I'm hoping that the fact that the institution is the owner and beneficiary under this annuity won't cause a problem. Any thoughts from those of you who have run into this type of arrangement before? I don't see any problem with the Restricted IRA itself -- I'm just not sure that an annuity was the way to go.

I have a small DB plan where the owner is taking his RMD. During 2009 he took $9995. This is and END OF YEAR valuation so the assets as of 12/31/09 are less the $9995 he took. There is no Target Normal Cost for the year.

When calculating the Funding Target, since it's based upon the accrued benefit as of the first day of the plan year, would I add back the $9,995 RMD distribution that was taken on 12/01/2009 for "calculation purposes" for and End of Year valuation?

Seems to me if you need to "pull out advance deposits" you should "add in" distributions....right?

How soon does the average plan force out termed associates? Monthly, quartely, day after terming?

We have not been doing forced distributions as we shoull have, nor has our record keeper. We want to clean this up. Our plan spells out force outs, under $5,000 but only for the amount-- not the timing. We do have a fair amount of rehires, so we want to be careful.

Thank you

A client has approached us to be their TPA.

The client has a 403b Plan and a separate Profit Sharing Plan.

The client never adopted a written plan document by December 31, 2009. The 403b plan just has salary deferral, no employer money.

What do we do about not adopting a written document by 12/31/2009?

The client would like to merge the 403b Plan into the Profit Sharing Plan. Can this be done? Can the 403b assets be transferred to the Profit Sharing Plan? Does the 403b plan have to be terminated?

Looking for some thoughts....

Thanks.

I need a little help!.

I have a group health client (63 employees) where the employer currently pays 100% of the premiums for both Employee AND Dependent Health Coverage, They wish to continue this practice for all of their current employees however they do not wish to pay for benefit coverage for any future new employees, and they've asked me how they might effectively do this. The idea is to not reduce any benefit their current employees have while reducing their future cost exposure.

I can't think of any way they can effectively do what they want, but I can't find a statute that specifically precludes this type of "discrimination". Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

A public school is the employer. Can the employer contribute to a 457 or 403(b) plan for an employee if the employee chooses not to elect the medical insurance offered by the employer. If the employee was to take the medical insurance, the employer would pay a portion of the premium. There is a cafeteria plan in place for this employer.

I am perplexed. The definition of "includible compensation" appears to allow contributions to a 403(b) for five years after an employee's termination of employment. The 403(b) explanation at irs.gov confirms that understanding.

On the other hand, RIA has the same definition for includible compensation but then (citing the regulations) indicates that the exclusion does not apply to former employees. What am I missing? Can a contribution be made by the former employer which is taxable income as contributed?

In his self-directed account, the owner of a company is invested in his company stock (about $120,000 worth). He gradually wants to buy back these shares. Under what conditions may he purchase the stock from the plan?

Are paid interns considered common-law employees and, if so, can they be categorically excluded from participating in a plan (subject to the minimum coverage and nondiscrimination rules)?

There is some discussion in my office as to whether 13B should be marked No or left blank. We haven't filed any plans yet so can someone provide me some information on whether a plan is rejected with or without line 13B completed?

Thanks.

How much relief is available under the operational failure guidance for non-exempt SARs? I can study the Rev Proc but maybe someone can advise on how, in very general terms, generous the relief is.

All:

Just a heads up for Web Client users. There are 3 security questions that the plan sponsor has to answer when completing their profile for the first time. I just found out that if the client is inactive for over a period of 1 month and tries to login to Web Client they will need to provide the answers to ALL THREE security questions before they are allowed to proceed.

What does this mean for us? It means since practically every client will only access this system once a year to complete their 5500 filing they will ALL have to remember the answers to the security questions when signing in next year to sign the 2010 5500.

I forsee this being a complete disaster. Please submit an incident to Relius and let them know that they need to remove this feature from their system. I sent them an incident yesterday.

Thanks!

Form 5500-SF instructions, for a one-participant plan, indicate that the only Part III items that need to be completed are Lines 7a-c and 8a.

The sofware that I am using automatically populates Lines 8c (total income), 8h (total expensee), and 8i (net income).

Since the amounts automatically populated by the software do not represent the actual totals, should I blank them out?

Our office has been trying to make a determination on the new feature code 2T. Is this new code referring to a "general" default investment option contained within an investment contract or is it specifically referring to the QDIA rules? If other than a QDIA, what if a default investment option is available in the contract but isn?t being utilized because affirmative investment elections have been made by all participants? Should 2T still be used under these circumstances?

We have yet to see a participant directed contract that doesn't contain a default investment option and are not even sure under what circumstances that would ever occur. In which case, it would seem that if 2T isn?t for a QDIA, then every single filing we do with participant direction should have 2T listed. If so, what?s the point of having the code?