Retirement plan documents now is mostly about IRS-preapproved documents, and seldom does an employer apply for a determination.

Beyond Form 5300 applications, what is it that enrollment as a retirement plan agent permits an ERPA to do (that one could not do without enrollment)?

Is it only about the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System?

Does the right to represent a taxpayer in the IRS’s examination of a Form 5500 report matter?

Is there something else allowed for an ERPA (but precluded for others)?

Participant terminated 1/2/2018 and was 72 at the time of termination. Not a 5% owner.  Under the RMD rules he could postpone his first RMD until 4/1/2019.   If he did, he takes a second RMD in 2019 for 2018.

The participant rolled his account balance to an IRA on 5/1/2018. The IRA custodian is now telling the participant he had to take his first RMD before the funds were rolled. The 401(k) recordkeeper is saying he did not have to take the RMD before rolling the funds.

I do not agree with the recordkeeper.  I say the participant HAD to take the 2018  RMD before the funds were rolled.  The first RMD is technically for  2017, the second is for 2018. Even though he could postpone the payment until 4/1/2019, the rollover to the IRA triggered the RMD.

Need some help in understanding what and when the payment needed to be issued.  To complicate matters, the Rep from the Recordkeeper said when they spoke to the  IRS about this matter, ( called the 800 number) IRS rep  told her the funds did not have to be returned to the 401K trust and paid. The payment could be made from the IRA. Anyone else have issue with this response?  

A prevailing wage plan has loan repayments going back into the plan with pre-tax money from the payroll.  In addition, the loan repayments are being paid by the "untaxed/pre-taxed" fringe benefit dollars.

My understanding is that loan repayments are paid with after-tax dollars.  A participant is repaying part of the loan with money that has already been taxed. As you know, one of the benefits of contributing to a 403(b) or 401(k) is the fact that the money is invested pre-tax. When a participant takes out a loan,  he/she isn’t taxed on the proceeds, but the money used to repay the loan has already been taxed so the additional interest going into the account will effectively be taxed twice–at the time of contribution and again when eventually withdrawn from the account in retirement.

The rules would not change just because this is a prevailing wage plan?

We are a TPA firm who does some COBRA administration. Received a call from a distraught person because his COBRA was stopped due to non-payment. He sent a partial payment to cover May then sent nothing for June & July. He was then notified that coverage was stopped due to lack of payments. His argument was that he never received any payment coupons nor did he receive any "warnings" that coverage was going to end.

 He had signed off on all of the initial COBRA paperwork which stated the costs, payment of premiums, etc.

My question is whether he has any push back.

Thanks!

Appreciate some insight into this situation.

Calendar year 401(k) plan.  Company is sold in March, 2018.  Company terminates 401(k) plan effective 3/18/2018. 

A participant had already earned over the annual comp limit, deferred the max, and received the max match based on the annual limit, prior to plan term.

I believe due to the short plan year that we now have to prorate limits, including the comp limit?  If that is correct, the participant's match deposited exceeds the allowable amount using the prorated comp limit.

If that is all correct, is it acceptable to treat the overage as a mistake of fact, given that the match was calculated using an incorrect compensation amount, and return the overage to the employer?  Or must the overage be moved to the forfeiture account. 

Thanks very much.

Employer is asking if he can include Union Office Manager in his 401k/PS Plan.  Knee-jerk reaction is NOOO!  I think he has 20+ other Union plumbers.  Would like  any other opinion.

So, the 5% owner hits age 70.5 in January 2017, and we do his 2017 RMD in 2017.  No one blinks.

Now we find out that he sold his portion of the business "one second after the stroke of midnight" (who knew lawyers could be poets?) (I find it hard to believe that that's what they were doing while singing "Auld Lang Syne") into 2018 to avoid taxes in 2017, and he is arguing that he doesn't need a 2018 RMD.  I explain that, at least in this instance, once he is in RMD pay status, that's where he stays.  Grudgingly accepted.

Here's the question - his wife turns 70.5 in 2019.  Is she off the hook because the stock was sold before the calendar year in which she turns 70.5?  If she is still employed in 2019, do I go to the definition of HCE, which has a lookback year and because her husband owned more than 5% of stock for a second in 2018, she has to take a 2019 RMD?  Or do I go to the definition of "5% owner", which does not includes a lookback year?  Personally, I'm hoping she terminates and takes her entire balance before the end of 2018! 

Thanks.

The 401(k) plan has auto enrollment. Apparently a few years ago, three participants were not auto enrolled and it was discovered on audit. HR spoke with these employees and they all indicated they would have opted out from the start if they had been provided with an opt out form. If we have them sign a document indicating they would have opted out, will that save us from having to make corrective contributions on their behalf? Of course that would save us money and make our lives much easier, but it somehow doesn't seem quite right to me. While the employees are willing to execute such a document, I could see the IRS arguing that employees could be pressured into signing such types of documents to please their employers etc. 

Any input would be appreciated. 

One participant plan owns real estate that is rented out. An organization filed a complaint against the property manager and the 401k as the owner of a house. Are attorney fees a settler function or can the plan pay the attorney fees?

A deemed distribution of unpaid loan balance in 2015 after leaving employment was recorded on tax return as income. If loan is then paid back three years later including all interest etc.. Can an amended tax return then be filed to remove the 1099R distribution?

Putting aside all of the other complications and concerns with ROBS, let's assume the structure has already been finalized and implemented.  Now, the C corporation that is owned by the Plan goes to a lender to borrow money to finance its inventory, general operations, what have you.  The lender is happy to lend the money to the corporation as long as the principals - i.e., the individuals whose Plan accounts own the stock - will guarantee the loan.  Would providing that guarantee be a pt?  

2  plans with common ownership, have a different match.  For ADP and ACP, one is prior year and one is current year. 

Can we voluntarily combine the plans for just coverage?

Medical group sells practice July 31, 2018.  Former doctor employee terminated employment in 2016 and is 20% vested in PS source.  The terminated doctor has not incurred forfeiture since he has not been cashed out nor has he had 5 break in service years.  We believe full vesting must occur here.  But the client does not want to provide full vesting due to termination circumstances.  I'm right - right?

Thank you in advance for comments. Tom

An employer is considering becoming an adopting employer in a MEP. We advised this potential adopter to ask for a copy of the 408b2 notice. The sponsor of the MEP refuses and states they have no obligation to provide the 408b2 notice to adopting employers. Their reasoning is that the 408b2 regulations apply to the covered service providers and themselves as plan sponsor of the MEP (i.e the fiduciary referenced in 408b2). They state the adopting employer is not a plan fiduciary and therefore will not provide it. 

After reviewing 408b2 I think the MEP sponsor is right. However, how is an employer supposed to make a good decision for their employees if they don't know who is being paid what? All they have is the participant fee disclosure and cannot compare total cost between a MEP or sponsoring their own plan?

Curious of anyone's thoughts. Thank you

Employer has several USA Divisions and there are 3 401(k) Plans:

- Plan A by other TPA - Age 21 and 6 months, with monthly entry dates, Safe Harbor Match

- Two Plans by us as TPA - Plan B has entry on the date of hire and is a Safe Harbor Match. Plan C has a 2-month wait, with monthly entry dates and discretionary match.

Plan C is a smaller Plan and will not pass coverage on its own. However, this Plan was effective 01/01/2017 but they did not hire anyone until mid-November 2017 (i.e. no contributions as no one was eligible).

We cannot use the RPT for coverage - correct?

If not, I believe we can use the ABT - correct?

Other than a management function scenario, I believe there must be some cross-ownership for an affiliated service group to exist correct?

In other words, suppose you have an employee of an accounting firm (no ownership) start his own firm. Then 100% of his work is done for the accounting firm. He owns 100% of his corporation but has 0% and has never had any ownership in the accounting firm.

No affiliated service group?

Thanks.

Plan has 401(k), Safe Harbor Match, and Class Based Allocation for Profit Sharing.  1,000 hours and last day required to receive the Profit Sharing.

When I run rate group testing, two employees who terminated before the end of the year show up.  They both worked 1,000 hours, but they are not benefiting because they terminated their employment.

I am having a brain freeze.  If these employees are not benefiting and are receiving no employer contribution, why would they be included in the rate group testing?  Is it because they do not meet a statutory exclusion?

Thanks!

A U.S. 401(k) participant  is married to someone who resides in India.  Originally when she filled out the 401(k) beneficiary form she left the money to someone else.  Once she was told that she had to get spousal consent to leave him off, she filed a new beneficiary form with the same beneficiary designating herself as single.  What are the ramifications of this to the plan sponsor?

Company wants to deduct its 2017 PS and SH contribution on its 2018 taxes?

Scenario 1:  taxes filed 3/15.   Contrib made Aug 15.

Scenario 2:  taxes on extension.  Contrib made Aug 15.  Taxes to be filed 9/15.

Scenario 3:  taxes filed 9/1.  Contrib made 11/1.

e have a SARSEP that has always passed the testing in previous years. It did not pass. The 2 HCE's are over 50. Can the excess be re-characterized as catch up contributions as in a 401k plan?