I tried looking up an EIN using freerisa.com and did not get a hit. I think freerisa.com's database only includes EINs of companies that sponsor qualified plans -- can someone confirm? If true, is there another website with a database of all EINs issued by the IRS?

Thanks.

Edited version - I left out a sentence in original version - inserted below in italics.

I think Blinky should have to answer this one. (This is a real situation, by the way)

You have three businesses - corporation A, B, and C. All sell catfish fillets or fish sandwiches or some such stuff. All are owned by a combination of the parents and adult children. Ownership is such that A & B are clearly a controlled group, but C is not, at least at first glance. No stock options, etc.

They have been operating a plan as a controlled group, and came to us to take over administration. We told them that they need to get an attorney's opinion as to whether C is part of a controlled group or not. If attorney says yes, fine with us! But something was mentioned which I have never encountered - these businesses are evidently franchises, and these particular franchises are only granted to an INDIVIDUAL, not to corporations. The father is granted the franchises, then somehow farms it all out to the corporations. So is it possible that this franchise arrangement when swirled together with the ownership somehow transforms it into a legitimate controlled group? (And it isn't an affiliated service group, according to client)

I'm not sure if this is something they did on porpoise, or if I'm being fed a line. But it may be a very effishient way to conduct business. If it turns out to be illegal, I'm going to whale for the carps, and perhaps a sturgeon to perform brain surgery on the appropriate people. If the attorney won't rule in their favor, it may require an act of Cod. I thought the whole situation smelt anyway.

Under the attribution rules of 318(a)(4) stock in a company shall be considered owned by a person if they have an option to acquire it. Has anyone attempted to make an otherwise NHCE an HCE, by having the employer give them options to acquire stock?

Obviously, there appears to be a lot of smell test issues here, but I was just curious to what degree anyone has used this.

Anybody out there using Relius to process ESOP's? If so, is there a Relius ESOP users group, and if not are you interested in forming one? I'm not sure how you go about doing so, but I figured this is as good a place as any to start!

Anybody out there using Relius to process ESOP's? If so, is there a Relius ESOP users group, and if not are you interested in forming one? I'm not sure how you go about doing so, but I figured this is as good a place as any to start!

There is a law in IL, the Illinois Contraceptive Equity Law, that prohibits insurance companies that cover prescription drugs and devices from excluding coverage for contraceptives. IL is the 21st state to enact such a statute.

An employer in IL has a self-funded medical plan.

Would this law apply to that plan?

An integrated profit sharing plan calls for a 5% contribution of total pay plus 5% of pay in excess of the SSWB.

For 2003, an executive participant whose total pay is $224,330.46 gets $15,650; [5% x $200,000 + 5% x ($200,000 - $87,000)].

How much would a sole proprietor get if his SEI were $224,330.46? My calculation which is in the attached acrobat file either gets him an additional $282.50 or has an error in it. Is it correct? If not, why not? Thanks for letting me know.

Calc_SP_Cont.pdf

Does anyone know if it's legal to allow an employee to make charitable contributions using pretax dollars?

In other words we would withhold funds pretax and submit them directly to the charity on behalf of the employee.

We plan to match all voluntary charitable contributions made by our employees but would like to offer them some tax advantage if it's possible to do.

Anyone heard of such a thing?

Can a terminated employee take a hardship withdrawal instead of cashing out their balance? Wants to use to purchase a residence. What is taxable and what has to be withheld?

PS plan year is CY. Company fiscal year is CY. DB plan year ends 9/30. So we determine the 25% limit based on the DC plan year ending 12/31/2003 and the DB plan year ending 9/30/2003.

But now the company decides to "fix" the DB plan year, using a 3-month short plan year 10/1/03 thru 12/31/03. Since there are now two DB plan years ending in fiscal year 2003, does this impact the determination of the 25% limit? (teh short plan year contribution will be contributed in 2004, and the company has anticiapted that it would be deducted in 2004.)

Plan X has a percentage limit on 401(k) contributions. There is a lower percentage limit on 401(k) contributions by highly compensated employees. Plan X typically monitors the percentage limits on a payroll-by-payroll basis. For 2004, the sponsor determined that a number of participants were non highly compensated and allowed them to contribute up to the higher percentage limit. However, it has since determined that certain elements of compensation were not properly included in making the HCE determination and that these people are in fact HCEs. How should it correct this a) limit deferrals by these HCEs prospectively so that the annual deferral percentage does not exceed the plan limitt? b) limit future deferrals to the HCE percentage limit and refund past deferals in excess of the HCE percentage limit?

One person plan - Sponsor, Plan Administrator, Trustee and sole participant are all the same individual who has recently passed away. As a participant, he completed a beneficiary form listing his four children equally.

However, who now has the authority to execute those beneficiary distributions? Thinking in a larger plan frame of mind - the employer appoints the trustee and the plan administrator. Therefore, whomever has been given "responsibility" for this sole proprietorship in his estate would have to name a new trustee? Does anyone have any other thoughts on this?

Bonus question - any idea what type of documentation should be presented to the brokerage firm holding the assets to prove who the new trustee should be?

A friend presetned this scenario, and I am having a hard time coming up with an argument that allows him to change his election. Here's the situation if anyone has any thoughts:

Employee is expecting a baby to arrive in 2004, and expects to have about $4,000 in birth-related expenses, so in November 2003, he makes a 2004 Health FSA election for $4,000. Baby is actually born in 2003, and the birth expenses are only $1,000 due to a voluntary reduction in the charge for the birthing service. The birthing service is is not billed until 2004, and is reduced from 4000 to 1000 after it is billed.

I think if its not too late under the employee's plan, the 2003 election could be changed due to the change in family status, but does anyone see a way to change the 2004 election?

Joe Smith set up “Joe Smith Ministry” (501c3) and receives contributions from various church organizations. He does mission work abroad with the funds and pays himself and his wife $25,000 each as 1099 income which their CPA shows as self-employment income. Can they establish an individual 401k plan?

I know that if a NHCE receives an allocation of SHNEC, QNEC, or Top Heavy Mandatory, they will also need to receive the gateway minimum. I can find pleanty of posts that discuss that in detail.

Does the QNEC in turn satisfy the gateway? Let's assume that a plan fails the ADP test for 2003. In order to pass the test, the employer needs to contribute a 5% of comp QNEC to each eligible NHCE. Does this 5% also automatically satisfy the gateway as well or is there some obscure cite that says you can't get the double benefit out of the QNEC?

For simplicity sake, let's assume that all of the employees have met the statutory entry requirements and are all eligible for all contributions...that way we won't get off on an "otherwise excludible" tangent (as fun as that would be...).

Thanks in advance!

In 1997 I rolled my company 401K into an IRA and deposited it in a private investment fund. I took withdrawals in 2001 and 2002 and reported them as ordinary income and reported a 10% penalty as I am not yet 59.5.

Late in 2003 I learned that the neither the fund nor the principal were licensed with the SEC and was operating illegally and the principal has now been charged with fraud. The money is gone and myself and many many other retirees are broke.

My questions are: should I refile for 2001 and 2002 to redefine the invested money as a straight withdrawal of the basis rolled over from the 401K and how should I treat the 2003 withdrawals and penalities? Thanks in advance for any assistance with this.

Does anyone have statistics on the number of manufacturing companies with between 1000 and 2000 employees with DB plans? What percentage of those plans are frozen? Are there any suggestions on where to find statistics like these?

Thanks so much.

It appears from my reading the rules on a Simple 401(k) Plan are the same as for a Simple IRA plan in the "exclusive plan" rule (needs to be the only plan of the employer). Is there anything out there that would allow a Simple 401(k) Plan [vs. a Simple IRA Plan] to be amended (restated) into a regular 401(k) plan mid-year and not violate the "exclusive plan" rule ?? It sounds like the def'n of "exclusive plan" for Simple IRAs are no accruals/contributions can be earned in the same calendar year under the qualified plan, and maybe that's "exactly" the same criteria a Simple 401(k) Plan, but I'm hoping that maybe with a plan/trust arrangement a Simple 401(k) Plan might have an amendment option even within the same calendar year. Any thoughts ??

Assume a 401(k) profit sharing plan provides for a 401(k) contribution, a 401(k) safe harbor nonelective contribution (intended to satisfy the 401(k) safe harbor design) and a discretionary employer contribution (allocated under a new comparability formula). Eligibility for the 401(k) contribution is immediate. Eligibility for the safe harbor nonelective and discretionary employer contributions are attainment of age 21 and completion of 1 year of service.

Can the employer provide the safe harbor nonelective contribution and discretionary employer contribution only to those participants who have satisfied the 21 & 1 requirements despite the fact that everyone can make elective deferrals?

Unless I have lost my mind, it has been permissible to divide a plan into the part covering those participants who are 21 and 1 and those that are not. As is usually the case, the part of the plan covering the participants who are not 21 and 1 generally is limited to NHCEs and, as a result, automatically satisfies both coverage and discrimination testing. Suppose the part of the plan covering those participants who are 21 and 1 must be cross-tested. Can the plan provide the gateway contribution and/or the 401(k) safe harbor nonelective contribution just to this universe of participants or must the plan now provide either or both to all participants, even those who have not yet satisified the 21 and 1 conditions?

I thought the answer was an easy "yes, absolutely", but an article recently published by Aspen publishers in their 401(k) Advisor circular suggests that the answer is a definitive "no". The reasoning, as I understand it, goes like this: the 401(k) safe harbor contribution must be provided to anyone who is eligible to make an elective deferral (regardless of the application of the statutory/nonstatutory distinction); since everyone is eligible to make an elective deferral, everyone must receive the 401(k) safe harbor contribution; anyone who receives the 401(k) safe harbor contribution is "benefiting" under the employer contribution component of the plan; anyone who benefits under the employer contribution component of the plan must receive the minimum gateway contribution. Consequently, anyone who is eligible to defer, the argument goes, must receive both the 401(k) safe harbor contribution and the minimum gateway contribution (assuming the employer contribution is subject to cross testing).

Does anyone have any thoughts on this issue? Any guidance or help is appreciated. Thanks.

Does FAS 109 establish the principle that, if a company accrues a SERP liability and expects that the accrual will result in a tax deduction in the future, the company can reduce its current year tax expense and record a deferred tax asset?

If the above is true, can the company effectively deduct its entire annual pension expense in the year accrued?

Does this principle also apply to DC plans, if so, can the company deduct the entire deferral or only interest on the deferrals?

Is GAAP required to apply this principle?