Employee/Owner A made $53,000 last year.  He deferred $24,000 (he was catch up eligible for 2016).  Employer makes a safe harbor match contribution of 100% of deferrals up to 4%.  So his calculated safe harbor match is $2,120.  Employee/Owner would like to maximize his contribution.  There is enough non-owner compensation that we do not need to worry about the company's 25% deductible limit.

I have calculated his profit sharing as $26,880.  Another colleague is saying he can receive 32,880 in profit sharing since he is catch up eligible and his limit is actually $59,000 and not $53,000.  But I did not think that he could receive more than 100% of his compensation.

Who is correct?

Does anyone have experience in seeking relief for a Section 411 debarment--i.e., relief permitting convicted felon to serve as consultant to an employee benefit plan prior to the 13-year restriction period?  We have client who just discovered that they have long-term employee with felony conviction covered under Section 411.  Employee is a clerical worker in insurance agency / TPA type group that does work for group benefit plans.

In particular, I am interested in thoughts / experience around:

• Assume individual is prohibited from serving even in a clerical type position if some of the employer's services constitute consulting for ERISA plans
• Any sense how long it usually takes to pursue relief / how much time and effort is typically required assuming relatively sympathetic case--conviction more than 10 years ago and individual has been clean and conviction had some sympathetic facts (innocent spouse type issues)
• Any thought that client is in trouble for unknowingly employing individual for the prior few years when was unaware of law, her conviction and there has been no trouble plus has taken action to suspend her work while investigating.

Thanks for any advice anyone may have.

For DB plan terminations subject to PBGC requirements, other than for "small" plans (let's say more than 25 or more participants), what is your experience on the division of responsibilities?

1.  No ERISA attorney involvement; plan actuary prepares all filings, notices, any necessary plan amendments, and represents plan sponsor/plan administrator before PBGC and, if applicable, IRS.

2.  Plan actuary does everything, subject to ERISA attorney review.

3.  ERISA attorney does everything except calculations and certifications required by the actuary.

4.  Other?  

We administered a 1 participant defined benefit plan for a number of years. The plan had a 30% investment loss one year and the business owner got upset with us when we gave him the minimum contribution for the year. It was, of course, somewhat higher than in previous years. In any event, he left us. A year later he came back. It turned out he prepared and filed the 5500-EZ timely and the company funded the plan properly. The only problem is no schedule SB was prepared or filed for that year.

So the 5500-EZ was filed on time but we will need our actuary to currently sign the schedule SB that should have been signed about a year ago.

I would think if the plan were audited, we would get charged the $1,000 for a late schedule SB. Do you think that because the schedule SB is part of the 5500-EZ that we would also be charged $25 per day for a delinquent filing of the 5500-EZ?

We could file under the delinquent 5500-EZ program, but the instructions indicate that they do not want the schedule SB included in the submission. This because it was not required to be filed in the first place.

Is the taxpayer exempt from the 10 percent penalty tax when making a pre-age 59.5 withdrawal from the annuity contract?

We took over a plan in 2016 that uses prior year testing.  I need to run the ADP test for 2016, and I cannot find where in Relius I would enter the prior year NHCE ADP so that I can run the 2016 test.  Is there a place it can be entered, or should we have created a 2015 plan year for this purpose?  Groan.

Relius is closed, it's Friday, and I'd like to get this completed before Monday if anyone can provide assistance.

Thanks!

I need suggestions on 8955-SSA filing software. All I need is something for the 8955 electronic filing. 

The IRS site provides a list of vendors but the vendor websites do not provide much information.

Thought I'd check here for reviews before calling the vendors listed.

Thank you

I have looked everywhere for the rules pertaining to safe harbor loan provisions. 

Does anyone have any documentation in reference to this topic? 

Rev. Proc. 2017-18 provides that the RAP begins on 1/1/10 and ends on 3/31/20.  Therefore, a 403(b) plan sponsor can adopt a prototype or VS plan by 3/31/20 retroactive to 1/1/10 and correct any issue with the old plan document.  However, a condition to this extended RAP is that the plan sponsor adopt a written plan document “intended to satisfy the §403(b) requirements” before 1/1/10.  Announcement 2009-89 says that you have to adopt a written plan document that is intended to satisfy the requirements of §403(b) “and the regulations” before 1/1/10.  I have been contacted by a client to restate their 403(b) plan.  However, the only written plan document they can find is a Corbel document signed in 2001.  My question is do you think they qualify for the 3/31/20 RAP and can just restate the document retroactive to 1/1/10?  My thought is that the 2001 plan can’t have “intended to satisfy the regulations” because it was signed before the 2007 regs were issued.  I hope I am wrong and can avoid VCP.

Under the prohibited transaction rules, an employer can make an in-kind contribution of real property to a DB plan if (among other things) the real property constitutes "Qualifying Employer Real Property."  I have a few questions regarding what constitutes QERP.

1. One requirement for property to be QERP is that it must be suitable for more than one use.  This is a "facts and circumstances" determination, but I haven't seen any real guidance as to what this means.  Does anyone have anything on that?
2. I have read through all the PTEs I can find, but I can't find a case of an employer donating foreign property to a DB plan.  Is there any reason foreign property shouldn't constitute QERP?

Thanks in advance for any help!

Plan compensation is W-2 plus deferrals and excludes fringe.

The Employer decided to do a profit sharing for 2016 and calculated the profit sharing on the gross compensation.  Out of 300 employees, only maybe 60 "could" be affected as they had some other pretax items come from their pay.  I would say most of the employees still received the correct profit sharing because the w-2 pay plus deferrals was the gross compensation.  If anything the 60 get a little more than they should have.(Got* not get.) edited

Auditor is bringing this scenario up as a topic of interest.

The employer is looking to me to help ease the audit question.

I don't find this to be that objectionable.  Should I?

Let me know your thoughts on this.

A participant dies at age 37.  He had no 401(k) Plan beneficiary form on file.  He has about $6,000 in his account.  In the absence of a beneficiary designation, the plan document states that the death benefit shall be payable to the Participant's spouse or, if there is no spouse, to the Participant's children in equal shares or, if there are no children to the Participant's estate.

The participant had no spouse and no children.  His parents also predeceased him.  There is a great aunt who has indicated that no one will be establishing an estate and no one will be claiming the retirement funds.  She had been advised that, as great aunt, she would not be entitled to the money.  Instead, it would go to the deceased participant's first cousins (of which there are 14), who either have no knowledge or no intention of creating an estate.

What should be done with the money if there is no estate or other beneficiary? 

I elected to have 6% of my earnings withheld to my 401k, however, my employer has been making that 6% deduction twice each pay period for the past 8 months. It was just discovered when I raised my election to 20%. Now my employer tells me they have deactivated my 401k withholding and I will not be able to contribute until  6% of each of my upcoming pays equals the amount that they over withheld. I have no issue with the amount they over withheld staying in my 401k as is and just moving forward with my new election percentage, however, they say it is not possible. Is it acceptable for this employer to keep me from putting money into my 401k because of a mistake they made? I am over 50 years old.

If an employer's arrangement to reimburse an eligible employee's payment of a premium for an individual health insurance contract follows all the rules and conditions for a qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement ["QSEHRA"] described in Internal Revenue Code section 9831(d), the arrangement is not a group health plan for ERISA section 607(1) or 733(a)(1).

But do other ERISA issues remain?

Does the employer's reimbursement of its employee's premium paid for individual health insurance make the arrangement a welfare plan defined in ERISA section 3?

Must a QSEHRA be stated by a written plan?

Must a QSEHRA's administrator furnish a summary plan description?

Must a QSEHRA's administrator adopt and follow a claims procedure?

What further issues should we think about?

Have a great day.

The CPA of the client asks me for my insight, which I have little of, in this case.  The business owners have been wanting to terminate their DB Plan for some time.  They say if they make a one-time contribution of about $20 million, the DB will be fully funded and then can be terminated.  The business owners ask, what is the tax deductibility of the $20 million contribution?  For example: in the current year?

Thank you,

Ray

I have been asked to review a DRO, and have found a number of issues.  While I have done this hundreds of times, this one is a problem.

The first issue is the amount is defined as a flat dollar value without adjustment for interest.  While this is fine, they fail to even define when the payment needs to be made!  Basically, whenever the Plan Adminisitrator feels making payment is appropriate.  Not disqualifying, but clearly sloppy drafting.  

Second problem is the the DRO makes the form of payment election for the beneficiary.  The Plan does state that with a QDRO the Alternate Payee is to be provided with all elections that would be available to the participant.  In addition, going by the DRO there would be no 402(f) Notice to the recipient.  I believe these 2 conditions would be a violation, making the DRO not qualified.

The language of the DRO states that if the Plan Administrator determines the Order is not qualified then the parties will cooperate with making those changes for the DRO to be qualified as defined by the Administrator.

With that finally point in mind, I called the attorney who drew up the DRO and had it submitted to the court for signature.  She proved to be the attorney that one article on QDROs identified.  Totally adversarial, and disrespect of all points made because I am only an ERPA.  Perhaps she is right, but I do have 32 years experience and her paralegal told me they have very little.  In fact, they wanted me to draw up the QDRO for them initially.  I said no as my job is to review, not create the QDRO.  Of course, my declining the honor of writing the QDRO for them is deemed as a reason that I have no right to bring up problems.

I feel I am stuck since I do not believe the DRO is qualified.  If I am in error on that, please correct me. Assuming I am right, what should the next step be since the attorney clearly has no intention of working to resolve these issues.  Any and all advice is greatly appreciated.

Currently using TSM which will no longer be supported after this year.  (using FtWm for documents/5500)

Considering Schwab SRT and ASC.  Thoughts on the two? anyone who has used both?  Recommendations for other software? Thanks!

We have been asked to respond to an auditor's inquiry.  We are not aware of any litigation regarding this company.  However, there is a union grievance related to changes they made to the retirement plan.  Has anyone considered the issue of whether a union grievance constitutes a "claim"?

I'm being told:

a) If they allow in-service distributions at age 65 then everything is taxable when someone turns age 65 due to constructive receipt rules;

b) If the Plan says you can take your distribution when you become an inactive volunteer, then everyone is taxable when they become inactive for the same reason.

Is this right?  I'm having a hard time finding a good article on the mechanics of how these things work.  Frankly it seems totally unworkable and I'm just curious if I'm missing something...