No money....LLC is either dissolving or going bankrupt. What happens? If there is no money and the LLC dissolves doesn't the liability go away?

Or can they pierce the LLC and go after the members, if dissolution? If Bankruptcy?

At the risk of sounding foolish and because I don't want to submit an incident and have to wait for weeks - can anyone tell me how I create an EFAST2 filing in the RGF software that I can send to the client for transmitting? I believe it must be an *.xml file, but can't seem to create one in RGF. I know how to create the *.pdf file, and know that can be imported to i-file, but aren't I supposed to be able to create an *.xml file as well? When I use the "create an EFAST2 filing" feature it wants the client signature?? (secret codes!)

We all know if the client provides those codes to me the client will be shot or at the very least drawn and quartered. (kidding OF COURSE)

All this for an "informational" return which will be immediately posted for public view?

I'll drop the sarcasm now...TGIF

If you've taken a cash distribution, can you borrow cash on margin in a non-retirement account to fund an IRA as a 60 day rollover? Does the same appy for regular contributions?

If a professional athlete - golfer or baseball player - receives pension benefits from the PGA or from MLB, are those benefits subject to United States income tax? If so, would only a portion of the benefits be taxable - the portion attributable to work performed in the United States? So for example if a MLB player from Japan plays for the Yankees, who travel to Toronto several times a year, is that portion exempt from U.S. taxation? Or a golfer from South Africa who plays tournaments all over the world - does he pay U.S. tax on his pension? Just on the portion attributable to service in the United States, or no U.S. tax at all?

Thanks

Quick question on using the Otherwise Excludable Employees option in my coverage/nondiscrimination testing:

I'm testing an aggregated plan with immediate eligiblity, and I want to carve out those employees not satisfying the statutory 21/1 eligibility requirements. My understanding is that, when applying the 21/1 eligibility, you also have to apply semiannual entry dates. So if I'm performing a 12/31/09 test, my disaggregated group would include anyone hired after 7/1/2008. In this case, that group unfortunately includes a couple of HCE's that were hired in the 2nd half of 2008 and still made over $105,000.

So my question is: Can I use a different entry date when applying the 21/1 eligibility? Specifically, can I use immediate entry after attaining 21/1 and therefore only include ee's hired after 12/31/2008 in my disaggregated group (and therefore guarantee they'll all be NHCE's when testing the 2009 plan year)?

It says in the EOB that no more than 50% of the vested account balance can be used to secure a participant loan.

If other security is obtained, could there be a participant loan that exceeds 50% of the vested account balance and not be considered a prohibited transaction?

(And, in any case, no more than $50,000)

In an IRS Q&A there's a reference to hardships not being permitted if the participant has access to a commerical loan (eg take the proceeds and pay the bill).

Facts: employee takes a hardship w/d about two times per year (this has been going on for years). Plan administrator requires hard proof of the hardship (eg does not just take the participant's word for it) eg copy of tuition bill, copy of uninsured medical bill etc. This participant has a child in college and various medical bills as many of us do. Thus hardships reasons have been easy to come by for this particular individual.

Latest request is for an uninsured medical bill for which the participant incurred costs some time ago, and opened a VISA credit card account to pay the bill. Minimum payments approx $150 / monthly payment. Participant claims can no longer afford the monthly payments. Only proof that has been presented thus far is credit card stmts (plan admininistrator is in the process of asking for the actual medical bills).

My guess is that if the participant were to forgo their monthly dishTV subscription they could pay the credit card (apologize for being harsh, am trying to stress a point).

How far does the plan administrator have to go in determining if the participant does or does not have reasonable means to pay the bill? The 401k plan is used as a checking account in this situation.

Had I not been presented w/ the history of the credit card account, I probably wouldn't have asked the question but I am concerned that the "exhausting of commerical credit lines" issue causes a problem here. Also - the participant already paid the medical bill w/ the credit card - so does that mean now that the participant is requesting funds for a credit card bill or is it a request for medical expenses? The only charges on the credit card are from the original medical bill - the card has not been used for any other purpose.

If this hardship were granted would anyone out there be concerned the validity of the distribution would be called into question upon audit? The plan admin is interested in doing the right thing eg is not using the threat of an audit as the basis for making the decision.

Appreciate any opinions, thank you.

My question is am I still exempt from Top Heavy requirements under the following circumstances: Dual eligiblity in this case means 30 day wait to defer and 1 year of service to receive 3% SHNEC

1. I have dual eligibility. Does that take me out of TH exemption all by itself?

2. I have dual eligibility and I pass coverage by testing separately those with less than one year of service. Am I exempt from TH?

3. I have dual eligibility and I pass coverage testing all employees as one group. Am I exempt from TH?

Just a couple of quick questions about a few of the reform laws that go into effect after 9/23/10.

1) Could an employer decide not to subsidies a portion of the employees health premiums if the employee is covering a dependent that is no longer a full time student or a dependent that is full time student but married? Or would the cost have to be the same for full time students and adult children not attending school? Would it be ok to have employee + family coverage premium where the employer subidizes X% of the premium and than charge a second premium (such as the full cost of the individuals premium) if the dependent is not a student or a married full-time student.

2) When does the medical loss ratio test go into effect? And does it impact medium to large employer self-insured plans? Or is this just for fully insured plans? I couldn't find that answer on google

If a professional athlete - golfer or baseball player - receives pension benefits from the PGA or from MLB, are those benefits subject to United States income tax? If so, would only a portion of the benefits be taxable - the portion attributable to work performed in the United States? So for example if a MLB player from Japan plays for the Yankees, who travel to Toronto several times a year, is that portion exempt from U.S. taxation? Or a golfer from South Africa who plays tournaments all over the world - does he pay U.S. tax on his pension? Just on the portion attributable to service in the Unitted States, or no U.S. tax at all?

Thanks

A governmental 457(b) plan covers only full-time employees. A part-time employee has contributed to the plan since 2008. To remedy this operation failure, can the plan distribute the elective deferrals plus earnings back to the employee? In addition, is the plan sponsor responsible for covering any loss on the contributions made to the plan?

FYI. I sent the following to my Congressman.

=============================

I am an Enrolled Actuary who does not practice in the defined contribution arena. Nonetheless, I urge you to oppose Congressman Lloyd Doggett’s (D-TX) proposal that would eliminate retirement benefits for many workers.

Under present law, individual account retirement plans are permitted to provide older workers with higher benefits to facilitate their catching up on their retirement savings. Such plans are generally required to provide all workers with a minimum contribution of five percent of pay.

Certainly, the concern is that owner-employees tend to be older and often when they retire, the business ends. Nonetheless, a contribution of five percent of pay is a significant benefit even if accrued over a period shorter than the employee's remaining working career. Five percent is certainly more significant than 0% which is where the employee will be at if law destroys the incentive for the employer to sponsor such a plan.

Please contact Acting Chairman Sander M. Levin (D-MI) or Ranking Member Dave Camp (R-MI) and ask them to oppose the Doggett proposal. Simply put, this proposal is a retirement plan killer that would result in millions of Americans losing their valuable retirement benefits

The final regs say that the Rate of Return calc (for credit balance interest accumulations) must take into account the timing of contributions and distributions.

How are others doing this with regard to contributions, by actual time weighting of all contributions, or by a shortcut of mid year or beginning of year deposit assumptions?

Said another way, is there a generally accepted approach to the weighting of contributions for ROR purposes under PPA?

MEWA plan subject to state law in MD. Can they invest in mutual funds and more specifically ETFs as long as under 5%?

Thanks!

I had what I thought was a simple eligibility question. My boss and I disagree on the answer. I have looked the answer up in various locations and have different interpretations. I would appreciate any thoughts and references.

Corbel Prototype Calendar year plan. Switches to Calendar year for svc, 1 year svc. 1/1 7/1 entry dates.

Hired 8/15/08

Terminated 4/15/09

rehired 4/21/2010

1st computation Period 8/15/08-8/15/09 over 1000 hours, but did not complete 12 months of service.

2009 worked less than 500 hours

Was gone over 12 months.

I have read the document and I am looking at sections that say "rehired Eligible Employee who satisfied eligibility" He satisfied the 1000 hour requirement, but not the 12 months or doesn't that matter.

The other section said Rehired Employee who had not satisfied eligibility.

Would appreciate opinions.

Eligibility is getting more complicated these days with lay offs and rehires.

Thanks for your help

Pat

DB plan on a volume submitter, terminating effective June 1, 2010. The Rev. Proc. (2010-6) indicates that restatement is not necessary in every circumstance, but that plans must be amended to comply with all applicable laws up to date of termination. Volume Submitter sponsor has received letter and can go ahead with restatements by April 30, 2012.

Prior to May 1 it seemed that restatement would not be necessary and we could simply amend for interim law changes. However now that May 1 has passed, are we now required to restate?

OK...so I have a plan that typically fails 415 due to a very large profit sharing contribution. In most cases, all of the employees pretax ($16,500) amount needs to be refunded to "correct" the failure. Is this still permited? What about EPCRS? How does that now come into play? I believe this is now considered an "operational" defect, but it does not seem to change the correction method. The plan does not intend to change their practices and will still have numerous 415 failures every year.

Any thoughts, guidance would be greatly appreciated.

Hi,

Background:

Our company has a cafeteria plan- the plan covers employees (=while employed) and makes no mention of retiree benefits. PPO Employee health insurance through a commercial insurance carrier is one of the benefits offered through the Caf Plan (which also includes, FSA, STD, Life, etc).

Our board is considering offering medical coverage to retired employees who have held the office of President of the Company (only; no other retired employees); no length of service in that capacity is specified (if that matters).

It's not decided whether the Company will seek any premium co-pay (contribution) from the retired President(s).

My thinking is that it is fine to offer this (albeit expensive benefit), which would be offered outside the caf plan, from the same provider as covers our employees. The policy would be (as specified by our current carrier) a Medicare supplement/secondary payer policy.

I'd like to contain this by offering only to the current retiring President, but confining the benefit to a particular individual seems discriminatory.

My concerns are: whether offering the benefit is legally discriminatory, that the Company is allowed the full tax deduction for the premium and that there is no 1099 income to the retired President(s).

Thank you in advance for your input.

I know that a trust can be named as a beneficiary designation. I also know that there are some requriements to name a trust. one of which is that the required documentation has been provided to the plan administrator.

1) I beleive that a trust ID may be one of the pieces of "required documentation". Is this correct? Is this true for all trusts?

2) Can anyone tell me what the entire list of "required documentation" is?

3) Is there a good reference I can read more about this subject?

4) Are there any citations and can be provided?

Thanks in advance.

Has anyone successfully transmitted a Form 5500 to DOL using Relius Government Forms but without using Web Client? I get an error message on the DOL site that processing is stopped because the form has not been signed by the plan administrator or plan sponsor. We were under the impresion that we did not need Web Client to use the Relius Government Forms to transmit our client's 5500s to DOL.