Brother Sister group exists between our Plan Sponsor and another company. The other company is Canadian. I understand that we would not have to consider any nonresident aliens with non us based income in our coverage testing. I am concerned, however, that if the Canadian company has US employees working for them in the US. I am curious, in practice, how other administrators handle this. Do you ask, as part of the administration work about US employees of the foreign entity? Am i correct that if any do exist, they have to be considered for coverage testing?

Thank you

The beneficiary of my uncle's IRA is a trust fbo my brother (my brother needs someone to manage the funds or else he will spend them). As trustee of the trust, I want to change custodians. How can I do that without suffering tax consequences? I want the IRA to be at my bank so I can make quarterly distributions to my brother (which I know he will be taxed on when paid). My bank is telling me that the trust can't be the owner of the IRA. Any sight would be greatly appreciated!

We just realized we didn't pay FICA upon vesting OR upon payment. We want to go back and fix it. Since the IRS can only audit going back 3 years, are we safe just correcting back to 2013?

We will be paying both the Employer and Employee portions of FICA. Do we have to amend employees tax returns?

Are there any other penalties/interest, etc. that we should be aware of?

Recordkeeper sent out a 1099-R for a 2015 loan default. It turns out the sponsor made a mistake on loan payments and now we are doing an EPCRS filing to correct.

What are the participants options with respect to his 2015 tax return?

Can he file it now?

Should he include an explanation that an IRS application is pending?

I assume the IRS will respond that income from a 1099 is missing, at which point we would resend the same explanation?

I assume this would delay any refund for the participant?

Is it permissible for a safe harbor 401(k) plan (basic match) to cap the amount of safe harbor match received by an HCE?

I know that the plan can provide that HCEs are excluded from receiving the safe harbor match, or that there can be allocation restrictions for HCEs, but is it permissible to put a dollar limit on the safe harbor match to HCEs?

Thanks.

What if owner sells his stock to an ESOP on January 1 and plan is calendar year. Considered an owner on 1/1 or not for ADP test purposes?

Does anybody have a good excel worksheet to calculate SE net income ? or can you point me to a site that has something to build upon?.

I have a partnership (2 ptrs), and neither made way over 265000, so I need to calculate their income - taking into account their share of employee profit sharing contributions.

Thanks!

Company A has a 401(k) plan, with participating employers Company B and Company C. They are a controlled group. Employee X owns 30% of Company B, but has no ownership in companies A or C. Is he still considered a 5% owner for determination of HCE and key?

I have a client who terminated their 401k plan and merged its assets with an MEP plan. Now it wants to leave the MEP plan and start another 401k plan. Plan id will be 002. Is there anything I should be aware of when setting up this new plan?

Thank you.

I found this thread from 2002 and thought it might be time for a new discussion:

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php/topic/15137-nipa-vs-aspa/

What are your feelings on:

1) The organizations as a whole? Is one geared toward a specific field (RK vs. TPA) or Employer size?

2) What about the credentials they offer? Is one more known and/or respected - either in the industry or to clients/financial advisors?

3) Education (including webcasts)?

4) Conferences? Both seem to have comparable "annual" conferences and now both have business owner ones too.

5) Networking opportunities?

As a small-business owner, NIPA has a business owner membership which allows my employees to all have (non-credentialed) memberships under me. Their annual conference is a bit more affordable too. But, to me, ASPPA and it's credentials just has a more recognized name in the industry.

I am anxious to hear your thoughts. Thank you.

Participant requested a hardship earlier this month. Today he contacted out distribution administrator to tell her that the sale might not go through as the current owner found out the property had a lien on it (from a prior owner I guess) and current owner doesn't want to pay/might not show up to the closing today.

Do, if participant doesn't close on this house, what should he do with his h/s distribution? Taxes have been paid on the disbursement and MassMutual sent the money to his bank account. If the closing doesn't go through today, the participant will continue to look to purchase another primary residence.

Thoughts?

A top hat plan credits participants with deferred comp each year until age 60. At age 60, participants vest, but further credits stop. Payout is on separation from service at any time after attaining age 60. Questions:

Does the ADEA apply to top hat plans?

If so, does this plan violate the ADEA?

If so, does that have any consequence under 409A (e.g., does an ADEA violation cause a violation of 409A, if the plan otherwise complies with 409A)?

Thanks for any help.

Hello,

Plan in question is a start-up - both plan and plan sponsor.

Plan sponsor established 5/1/15 & Plan effective 8/15. So first plan year is 8/1/15 - 12/31/15.

Eligibility is 18/no service for deferrals and 18/1 YOS for SHNE...monthly entry for all sources.

Anyone employed as of 7/31/15 is eligible for all contributions in the plan as of plan's effective date.

Out of 29 EEs, 25 were employed as of 7/31/15 and therefore are eligible for all contributions. The four hired after 8/1/15 are all eligible for deferrals, but not SHNE (duh).

I understand that when there is a dual eligibility situation, there is the potential for needing to segregate certain employees and test them if there is an HCE in that group. Most of what I find regarding this situation alludes to using permissive disaggregation of statutory EEs (to make up the safe harbor "plan") from those who are not 21 and haven't completed a YOS (tested "plan"). BUT - in this case, wouldn't that mean everyone in the plan falls into this category, and so I would need to test the entire plan for ADP? This makes for a return of $3150.00 and probably an angry plan sponsor and flabbergasted relationship manager.

To put it another way, when there is a situation in which some EEs are eligible for SH contributions, and others are not, is the OEE rule the only rule applied to testing, or is the option there to only test those who have not met the PLAN'S eligibility for SH contributions? If I were able to do that, I would have four people in my test - 1 HCE and 3 NHCEs. Under this scenario, I would have a return of about $20 bucks, and (hopefully) an understanding plan sponsor and (but probably still confused) relationship manager.

***Just for fun, the plan is also Top-Heavy for the first year (and probably forever - there are 13 keys), so those three NHCEs would also be getting a THM (HCE is also a Key, which is probably obvious to all of you ERISA experts!)

(And no, I had no input on plan design...)

Thanks to anyone who read this and offers advice!

Slappy

I'm having a "chemo brain" moment.

Plan is SHNE and top heavy. Eligibility for deferrals is immediate. Eligibility for SHNE is 3 months. Is it only the people not yet eligible for SHNE who must get a top heavy minimum, or everyone?

I was watching a webinar yesterday about a demand deposit alternative offered to qualified plans. The speaker was asked whether this account, which is FDIC-insured, was available to all defined contribution plans, including 403(b) plans. The speaker answered in the affirmative.

I am under the impression a 403(b) cannot have this type of FDIC-Insured Demand Deposit Account as it is not an annuity or mutual fund.

Was the speaker incorrect?

This is relevant as our bank is introducing a FDIC-Insured Investment Account as a money market alternative for qualified plans. It is available for advisors, providers. TPAs, and sponsors of qualified plans, but we were under the assumption it was not available to 403(b)s.

Thank you.

If we are using a Defined Contribution PPA approved prototype or volume submitter with no modifications that recently restated its document for PPA, are there any additional snap on amendments upon Plan termination that need to be executed as of February 2016?

I can't think of any but wanted to make sure I'm not missing something.

Plan is terminating effective 2/29/2016. The Plan offered a GIC investment. As a result of the termination, participants invested in the GIC will be charged and early withdrawal charge.

Can the Employer pay this fee?

There are only 8 out of 45 participants in the GIC that will be subject to the Surrender Charge. If the Employer pays the cost, and the fee is treated as a contribution, to these 8 participants, does the plan need to pass 410(b) as it relates to this contribution. If so, it will no pass coverage.

This report is...interesting, I think, if you are into political maneuvering. How the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs has input on this I don't know. I just read the exec summary.

http://benefitslink.com/m/url.cgi?n=26313&p=1456335090

THE LABOR DEPARTMENT’S FIDUCIARY RULE: HOW A FLAWED PROCESS COULD HURT RETIREMENT SAVERS

A Majority Staff Report of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs United States Senate
Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman

I know EPCRS doesn't officially recognize scrivener's errors as such, but will accept a retroactive amendment under VCP to conform the terms of a plan to its prior operations. One of the conditions--which is tough to fulfill in many cases where you want VCP relief to begin with--is that the retroactive amendment not violate 411(d)(6).

I'm reading some commentary saying IRS was apparently "considering" its stance on scrivener's errors after the Verizon case, but the new EPCRS came and went without clarifying.

Is anyone aware of the current IRS position or willingness to approve, especially where the amendment technically would violate 411(d)(6)?

Small employer sponsors MPP is considering a 401(k). They have to freeze or terminate the MPP I believe and give the participants normal distribution options under the plan as well as 204(h) notices, full vesting,etc yes?