Company has a cafeteria plan. The health plan is a benefit under the cafeteria plan and has less than 100 participants.

The company offers supplemental insurance. Some of the supplemental insurance plans have over 100 participants and the employee pays the entire amount on a pre-tax basis.

My thought is they should file Form 5500 to report the supplemental insurance policies that have over 100 participants. Their TPA feels that a filing is not required. Their argument is that this is a Premium Only Plan for which the employee pays the entire premium.

Can someone please help clear up our confusion on whether Form 5500 should be filed in this case?

Thank You.

A company sponsoring AB 401(k) Plan was bought out (stock purchase - 100%) by another company in January 2014. The AB 401(k) Plan remained separate, but the AB 401(k) Plan was not amended to update the new Plan Sponsor. It still has not been updated. AB 401(k) Plan will merge into another Plan as of 6/1/2015 because the company that purchased AB Plan was itself bought out (stock purchase – 100%) later in 2014. Any thoughts on corrections?

Hi everyone. I've been reading this board for some time. This stuff is even more complicated than taxes :/

So I've been trying to figure out a plan to maximize owner retirement options. I've been burnt in the past in a prior 401k through ADP because no one else contributed and I thought that would not be an issue. Needless to say, having 36,000 kick back was a hard lesson.

We are setup as an S-corp. Owners work part time.... other employees don't seem interested in contributing. What are my options? I'm open to discuss with a "professional" but I like to validate what I'm being told vs. what the pro may or may not understand.

I have figured out this so far:

1. 401k pre-tax with safe harbor match (18k each + 2.5 match each)

2. 401k post-tax contributions I cannot do, since that would trigger an ACP test that safe harbor would not cover I really wanted to max out the 401k post-tax and roll it over to a Roth IRA but looks like I cannot do this.

3. Personal Roth IRAs assuming the married filling jointly AGI is not exceeded.

4. Some type of defined contribution plan (prefer something Roth based since the money contributed it post-tax).

5. Other ideas? Does seem like PS will work in the 401k plan because the ages are very close and the salaries are fairly high.

Thanks for any ideas or input. A bit bummed that since everyone else doesn't want to contribute, the I can't do much either. All my bills are paid, so the salary is pretty much option to defer but I'm limited in what can be deferred.

W2Earnings >1000 hrs/yr Class PercentOwned BirthDate HireDate Projected Deferral Related

62,184 Y Owner 51 9/13/1971 1/1/2000 18000 Y
50000 Y Owner 49 2/19/1976 1/1/2000 18000 Y
110,768.00 Y Employee 0 7/29/1971 1/1/2006 0 N
75,573.00 Y Employee 0 6/7/1972 1/1/2009 0 N
75,266.00 Y Employee 0 11/3/1979 1/1/2009 0 N
74,472 Y Employee 0 11/5/1975 7/1/2013 0 N
32,688 Y Employee 0 3/27/1993 12/1/2014 0 N
30,000 Y Employee 0 9/19/1993 12/1/2014 0 N
49,992 Y Employee 0 3/20/1972 1/1/2014 0 N
15000 N Employee 0 9/3/1950 2/1/2014 0 N
15000 N Employee 0 2/23/1958 11/15/2013 0 N
8000 N Employee 0 2/24/1959 1/1/2015 0 N

Hello will i be able to remarry and still receive my pension when i become of age...I was awarded a percentage of his pension in the final divorce papers..

thank you

A participant terminated on 2/20/2015. His money is still in the plan. His loan balance as of 2/20/2015 is $1283.33. That was the day the last payment was made on the loan. I am now sending him distribution paperwork. Do I need to accrue the loan interest until his money leaves the plan, or do I use the loan balance of $1283.33 as his outstanding loan balance?

Thank you in advance.

I know this has been discussed a few times, but I am hoping to just get a simply clarification.

The situation is that we have a law firm that sponsors two plans. One plan includes only partners and staff. The second plan includes only associates. The partner/staff plan allows for both 401(k) deferrals and ER ps contributions (new comp allocation). The associate plan only allows 401(k) deferrals.

The plans each satisfy the 410(b) ratio test on their own. Since aggregation is not required the associates have not been getting the top-heavy minimum.

It is my understanding that we must include both plans in the average benefits test, and if passed we get to use the mid-point for rate group testing.

Questions: When the general test is performed must both plans be included in determining whether each rate group passes? More specifically, do associates get included in the denominator for each rate group? I understand the numerator only includes those participants actually receiving a ps contribution.

I just want to make sure that I am not including the associates improperly in any tests that would deem this aggregation in some way and therefore require the associates to get a TH minimum. In this case, the inclusion of associates would greatly benefit the GT.

Any input is appreciated.

Company A is acquired by Company B on 1/31/2015. Each has their own calendar year 401(k) plan.

The 401(k) plans are merged on 4/1/2015, creating a short plan year for Company A's plan.

An ADP test is run for Company A's plan using the deferrals and compensation from 1/1/2015 to 1/31/2015 (ie, prior to acquisition date).

Company A owners defer the maximum $24,000 into the Company A plan, and now need refunds.

Let's assume Owner A deferred $24,000 and now needs a $10,000 refund, which is distributed to him in 2015.

If Owner A goes to work for another company with a 401(k) in 2015, can Owner A defer the refunded amount of $10,000 into his new company's 401(k) plan in 2015?

That doesn't sound right, but would like to be certain that I am not missing anything.

Thank you.

Employer maintains an FSA plan. Employer makes some changes to their health plans and beginning 04/01 will have an HSA plan also. Can employees stop the FSA deduction so thta thye can participate in the HSA? I think the amnswer is no, but I do not do much with health plans so I am not positive.

Thanks in advance for any guidance.

We have a participant in the plan who just turned 70 1/2 earlier this month, so he's required to take an RMD for 2015 year (by April 1st, 2016). However, he requested to rollover the entire account balance to an IRA. My thinking is that we must issue an RMD and then rollover the remainder into the IRA. However, would it be possible to rollover the entire amount and have the Rollover Institution do a distribution? We could send them the balance as of 12/31/2014 to calculate the RMD. What do you think? Is that allowed?

What do I need to watch out for with a match that says the first 5% will not be matched, but then the match is dollar for dollar for 5% through 10% (i.e., the max match is 5% of pay, if you contribute 10%).

Same match formula applies to everyone. Is it just an effective availability test? Everyone in the organization is pretty highly paid.

What does one suggest when there is a prospect with a Board Resolution specifically authorizing an EGTRRA Restatement, but the only signature/date is on the Board Resolution,.. not the four corners of the EGTRRA Adoption Agreement?

Thanks for any input!

I would be very appreciative of any opinions on this question that I'm sure is not a black and white answer.

Plan has a provision with no minimum hours to get a contribution, and no last day requirement.

Company wishes to make a contribution for 2014 that is 3% for all employees emplolyed on 12/31/2014, and 0% for those who are not employed on that date.

In your opinion, is it violating the terms of the plan to do the above?

On the one hand, one can argue that by not selecting to require employment on the last day of the plan year, it is effectively an election that if you are employed on the last day of the plan year, you will get a contribution if one is made.

On the other hand, one can argue that while it wasn't elected as an automatic factor to deny a contribution, since each person is in their own rate group, nothing prevents an employer in a given year to apply the provision.

Thanks!

Craig Schiller, CPC

We have a situation where an entity is requesting documents/appealing a denial of a claim. The entity attached a form whereby the participant designed and assigned his/her rights to the hospital. However, the hospital was not the entity making the request, so we told the entity sorry, you aren't the authorized rep, the hospital is, then the entity sent us the fee arrangement between it and the hospital for collections, etc. I'm still inclined to say sorry - this is not sufficient to demonstrate the participant named your entity as the authorized rep... in fact, participant named hospital, not you. Thoughts??

We a plan that funds the 3% SHPS contribution each payroll period. All compensation is used, in other words they are NOT excluding comp prior to plan entry.

Are there any problems if the client waits until the end of the plan year to true up new hires 3% safe harbor. Right now they start the 3% upon plan entry and then we calculate the true up.

However should we require them to true up the 3% from the beginning of the plan year as soon as the participant enters the plan?

For purposes of purchasing an annuity under a plan termination that meets the "safest annuity provider" conditions, what is the experience on the commission percentage or flat fee that brokers charge for a small population?

For example, for a plan with a liability of less than $1 million, what type of charge could the plan expect?

If the liability is between $1 million and $5 million, would the rate be the same?

I have seen 6% commission in the past but have not processed one through a broker for a while. Thanks!

non profit company that files Form 990 as 501c3 did not submit 5558 to extend their medical plan 5500. question is, is there such a thing as an extension on form 990 that would allow said company to check off 'automatic extension' and not file under dfvc? (case in question would be due 4/15/15)

PYE = FYE = 6/30

EE attains age 70 on 8/xx/2014

EE attains age 70.5 on 2/xx/2015

RBD is 4/01/2016

First distribution year would be 2015 if RMD applies

EE has owned 100% of stock in the past but sells all of his stock. EE continues on as an employee of the company.

By what date must EE be a less than 5% owner to not have a required minimum distribution from the plan as a non-5% employee?

1 - 6/30/2014 (the last day of the prior fiscal year - so no ownership in the plan in PY 7/1/14 - 6/30/15; the plan year before he turns both age 70 and 70.5)

2 - 8/xx-1/2014 (the day before his 70th birthday)

3 - 12/31/2014 (the day before the 1st calendar distribution year)

4 - 2/xx-1/2015 (the day before he attains age 70.5)

5 - 3/31/2016 (the day before his RBD)

6 - some other date I haven't considered.

I think the answer is 3 - the day before his 1st calendar distribution year but I'm not sure if the the Fiscal Year being 6/30 and not 12/31 changes that. Also I'm having trouble finding the specific citation in the 401(a)(9) regs which I'm about to go through again but if someone knows it off hand, thanks in advance.

I had my doubts when I first heard about this as I was under the impression that when a participant is due their first RMD and they delay it until the 4/1 of the following year that they must take a 2nd RMD in that same year by 12/31. It seems that most others who monitor this kind of stuff also believe this to be the case.

However, it was recently pointed out that to me that 1.401(a)(9)-6©(1) says "Annuity payments must commence on or before the employee's required beginning date (within the meaning of A-2 of § 1.401(a)(9)-2). The first payment, which must be made on or before the employee's required beginning date, must be the payment which is required for one payment interval. The second payment need not be made until the end of the next payment interval even if that payment interval ends in the next calendar year."

So it appears that if a participant must take their 1st RMD no later than 4/1/15 (i.e., the RBD), the second one wouldn't have to be taken until 12/31/16. I'm wondering what others' take on this is since so many of my colleagues haven't been using this approach.

A client has a safe harbor plan. The current eligibilty is immedite but they would like to switch to 6 months. Can we amend the plan for 2015 and have it be effective 7/1/15 so it does not affect any current employees?

I know you "can't" amend a safe harbor plan, but since we are not reducing or suspending the contribution, I was thinking we could do it.

I am potentially in a big mess with my retirement accounts. I opened a 5305-sep ira in 2013 and put in $4k. I'm a sole proprieter with no employees. Before the year end in 2014 I opened a solo 401k. Then:

1. On 8 Jan 2015 or so mailed a check for $10k and contribution form for my SEP IRA to post as a 2014 contribution

2. on 12 Jan 2015 or so mailed a check for $8k and contribution form for my 401k employee deferral and marked it as a 2014 employee deferral contribution.

There is a big debate about 5305-sep IRAs and whether you can have them at the same time as a solo 401k. I'm not convinced I can't. In particular the wording is unclear whether the requirements to use the form are when the sep is set up or whether it is on going. Eg to adopt means to take on at a specific point in time. So I adopted the SEP IRA in 2013 when I didn't have a qualified retirement plan.

I was wondering what everyone thought about the situation and whether there are any easy fixes to just circumvent the issue entirely.

EG

Currently I have $18k deduction for sep/qualified plans in 2014. I have submitted my return for 2014.

I could take my sep ira deduction in 2015. Contribute $10k in my 401k for 2014 as an employer deduction (I believe I have until the 15 April). So the IRS will see

2014. $18k deduction for sep/qualified retirement plans

2015 $10k SEP deduction with a 2015 5498 showing $10k. I don't plan to contribute to the 401k for 2015 in this situation.

That way I didn't take a deduction for both for the same tax year.