austin3515

Just because it fits those parameters doesn't mean it is ok. Would you add something that says "must be over (or under) age 50"? No because that violates age discrimination laws. There's lots of things I wouldn't do because it was illegal, no need to limit the examples to just age

Anyone have any advice? Custodian will not open IRA unless participant signs the forms. Is there a custodian that will allow the employer to open the account without the employees signature, etc.?

Please share if you find it!

Pretty cool, right? Hey listen, if you can provide me something that says this won't work I'll reconsider, but my file contains the requisite approvals to make me comfortable.

P.S. here are the parameters for Other and I have not violated any of them.

VS in AA format, I used the "Other filed"

. Who can explain why clients want the things they want, but they do want them and that is that. Corbel blessed the 15 days after the end of the quarter language so that works for me

It's much easier not to put the money into the plan. Not to mention it saves them money.

Insignificant can failures can always be corrected under SCP.

Is there a window for how far back you can correct an ACP test? If it's failed 5 years can I do SCP? Only affects 1 HCE in all years.

Using last day of quarter rule on matching contributions. Would it be permissible to have as an allocation condition that states you are not eligible for the matching contribution unless you are actively employed 15 days after the last day of the quarter? So employment on 4/15 for the quarter ending 3/31. We are trying to avoid people requiring residual distributions after the match is funded.

You just blew my mind with something... LEt's say the 401k plan excludes owners? No top-heavy minimum?

The definition of a fiduciary is anyone with discretionary authority over plan assets. Are there any fiduciaries with respect to TIAA's old Individual Annuity products held by many schools/colleges? They have no control whatsoever which is why they are so frustrating from a fiduciary perspective. But perhaps that is their saving grace as a fiduciary?

Had that happen before too, with the retiring owner or something, and then you panic

Participant contributes 80% of pay and we use net comp. So 401k = 8,000, comp = 2,000 percentage = 400%. Relius let's it through. Anyone have a problem? I'm not aware of any reg and this is not a target QNEC situation.

Too damn complicated, I'm just waiting until 2015!

I guess I agree with you all. How can you make something unhappen that did actually happen. He was a Participant.

Can I amend the PS source plan entry dates today if the plan has a last day rule? Plan has entry dates retro to 1/1 in year eligibility was met and we want to make it 1/1 and 7/1 following. So some people who would have been eligible will not be. I say this is ok because they have not accrued a benefit yet due to last day rule. [i am aware that I need to watch out for any retirees, etc, if allocation conditions are waived].

hey I just realized something fun - you should be able to come up with a formula to calculate the break-even percentage based on the marginal tax rate! Have to work on that one!

Bingo, with one exception, and that is, unless you do a calc based on dollars instead of percentages it's hard to determine the value. What if 70% of the total goes to the owners? Is there net tax savings? Hard to say... But if $100K went in, you saved $45,000 in taxes and gave $30,000 to the employees (i.e., 70%), you saved $15,000.

Well now we're talkin...

I don't know, I researched this once before. The EOB was pretty clear, as stated above, once you've begun there is no mechanism to stop. RMD's must be done each year following your RBD. That's the only reasonable interpretation of what the code says. There is no provision in the code or regulations to suspend RMD's after your RBD. Considering the 50% excise tax you'd be nutso not to take them (a random informal power point on the IRS website notwithstanding).

That's what I do too. I'm surprised no tax firms have made something like this available. I've always said total deduction x tax rate - employee contributions to figure the tax savings. I think ESPECIALLY when you're talking about profit sharing that is the analysis for sure because the SHNEC already paid for the deferrals. If anyone took finance in college that is referred to as a "sunk cost" that should not be taken into account when deciding whether or not to fund the profit sharing. Of course in the plan design phase (or before the beginning of a plan year it is relevant. Geeze, maybe I just answered my own question

Yes, but do you include 401k in the "deduction"?

The finer points of trust-law do little to assuage this rationale individuals superficial concerns.