austin3515

Also, isn't it likely that this classification is based on the numnber of hours that someone works? So for example, your excluded if your non-benefits, and your non-benefits if you work less than 30 hours a week - problem, correct?

Can anyone shed some light or provide a link with more info on excluding non-benefits employees? Can the exclusion be that simple, provided the employer actually has that "type" of employee and uses it for all of their benefits. I just wanted to make sure there wasn't something more complicated about that exclusion then say "hourly employees." I know about coverage

Does he currently have another business with employees? Or is he just going out on his own now?

Also, the 8554-EP says my reporting cycle begins April 1, 2014. I assume when I file that 8554-EP, I report my CPE for CALENDAR 2011 and CALENDAR 2012? Right? What is the significance of April 1??

For the last two years, due to ERPA, I have been buying two webinars from ASPPA (primary and secondary) for myself and the other ERPA in the office. Is this necessary? I just looked at the 8554-EP and it seems that all they want to know is the number of total credits and the total of ethics credits in each reporting year. Do I need a certificate in my own name, or, provided I don't lie (which I do not), is it enough to keep my own listing and support for the CPE I take? For example, if we pay for one web-inar, and listen together, can we both claim the CPE on the 8554? The instructions do not seem to stipulate any such requirement. I found this in Circular 230 as part of the recordkeeping requirements, perhaps this is why it is required: "The certificate of completion and/or signed statement of the hours of attendance obtained from the continuing education provider."

I did think about it

I know an eleciton is required before the last day of the plan year, but instead of chasing these guys down every year, can I just have an evergreen election to defer the max allowed every single year?

Medical Practice owned 100% by A. A is also the director of a non-profit that sponsors a 403b plan. Is there ever a possibility that there could be a controlled group if there is at least one other director?

Plan is leaving an MEP Plan. Can the new plan include a provision that says "If you were deferring 5% in the old plan, that election will be honored in the new plan"? Similarly, can you include a provision that says "you're balances in the old plan will be trasferred to the new plan and be mapped to like funds?

1.403(b)-6(i) (i) Certain limitations do not apply to rollover contributions. The limitations on distributions in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section do not apply to amounts held in a separate account for eligible rollover distributions as described in § 1.403(b)-1 0(d).

From Sungard's 403b (part of the basic plan document, there is no mention of ISD's for rollovers in the AA): (5) Rollover Contributions; Employee Contributions. A Participant may elect to receive an in-service distribution of his/her Accounts attributable to Rollover Contributions and Employee Contributions subject to Sections 6.01(D)(2) and (3), except as the Employer provides otherwise in an Addendum. Distribution of a Rollover Contribution or Employee Contribution is subject to Section 6.04 if Section 6.04 otherwise applies to the Participant. 6.04 ANNUITY DISTRIBUTIONS TO PARTICIPANTS AND TO SURVIVING SPOUSES. Which doesn't apply to this conversaiotn.

Elective deferrals in 403b plan, with match in a 401a plan. Is there anyway to do this w/ Sungard? We have the 403b prototype and the 401k prototype, but I can't come up with a darn thing on coordinating the two. It seems to be a complete and total overhaul if I even try.

I'm not so sure there is a "due date" for top-heavy contributions. I've asked the question before, and there is certainly nothing like there is for Safe Harbor, which is clearly due by 12/31. Not to say I migh not add interest on after 12/31/12.

I'll choose my words carefully: That is what TIAA is saying some plan sponsors have concluded. No telling whether or not the DOL would buy it. I can tell you have that I have a financially strapped non-profit for whom we take this approach (an audit fee would be a very very big deal). We told them the DOL may not like it, but basically if TIAA was willing to publish and give it out to all of its clients, then it must have some merit, AND presumably was vetted with someone at the DOL (but we don;t know that). So we advised of the risk, but at the end of the day it's not up to us.

In order to exclude ALL terminated participants from the Plan, they must be invested 100% in TIAA investments - no CREF (i.e., mutual funds, in particular target retirement funds). Most of the TIAA contracts now include all of the CREF funds, but some of the older ones do not. They are excluded based on the provision in the 5500 instructions that says you can exclude anyone whose benefit is promised to be paid by an insurance company (instructions for line 6c). Not sure if the DOL agrees with this position by the way... You should REALLY read the relevant section of the FAQ I attached above.

Situation: Foreign company wants to set up a 401k in the US. Who can be the trustee? The people at the parent level obviously want that role, but they live in South America. TAG says no, because to be a domestic trust, the decisions must be made by US corporations, citizens OR residents, etc. Any thoughts? Has this been written up/addressed by anyone else?

Sungard suggests using the 401k prototype w/ a 0% limit on 401k. They also recommended editing the SPD manually to make it not ridiculous.

But can you tell me why that is your position?

Send em what you got. The IRS knows this is going on so they'll believe your story. As logn as your telling the truth you have nothing to lose. I think it is especially helpful coming from the TPA as an independent 3rd party with no incentive to lie.

I'd like to be on speaker phone when you try to explain that to the HCE's! For whatever it is worth, after reading MWedell's post, I am in complete agreement that it works with the HCE's at 1%. It clearly states the SHNEC for the NHCE's needs to be at least 3%. It imposes no minimum for HCE's, which is the very same reason we can give them 0%.

I think MWeddell has a point here on his interpretation. Do you not agree with his position here?

I am awaiting their response

If the suggestion is to define the HCE's Comp as 1/3 of total comp, that won't work. I'm pretty sure there is something in the regs that says it is a no-go. Are all of the HCE's maxing out their 401(k)? If not, you could do a 1% bonus for them and let them defer 100%. Assuming they are over the wage base, the only disadvantage would be medicare payroll taxes.

Exclude HCE's from SHNEC, and then give the HCE's a 1% profit sharing. My suggestion MIGHT fall apart if the plan is top-heavy (if you have dual eligiblity for example and a lot of eligibles not getting the 3% SHNEC already).

We use Corbel PT 401k Plan. Have a plan that WAS 401k, but now wants to be PS only. My dillema is that for things like hardship and in-service, the PS Prototype doesn't give me the options regarding 401(k), etc.; it assumes the Plan has ALWAYS been PS only. So I don;t think it will work. So what am I to do? Should I use the 401k document still, but just not check the box that says 401(k) contributions will be allowed and "blank" the whole 401k section? I think that is what I need to do, but looking for suggestions.