austin3515

I agree that would be another good reason, but in this scenario, everyone had self directed. And knowing the person involved, he is very very conservative aboutt his kind of thing so I believe it is what Tom was suggesting. Interestingly, I wonder if QDROhile is partially right as well. You say, "hey, the IRS could really come down on you hard, so I recommend having all of these individual plans" so you get more fees and can still sleep soundly at night. The more I think about it, really isn't that big of a deal to do this. You could have one "plan" on Relius (or whatever), you could even have everyone on a contract at John Hancock. So you really just have to do a few extra 5500-EZ's (since you now do not have to pass coverage in order to use the EZ).

I believe I've been down this road before and heard there was actually some basis in compliance matters (other than SAR and 5500EZ's).

Why woluld you have a separate plan for each owner? We're taking over a plan from someone we know is "legendary" so we know there is probably a very good reason!

Self employed individual. Trying to figure out if it makes sense to load up the profit sharing before doing any 401k (forget about the year-end election thing for the time being). Are the two treated any differently for payroll taxes? My belief is no, they are not. I know the owner gets no deduction for the 401k, and I don't believe they get a deduction for the profit sharing. Since it is very connected, I will say that I've always been bothered by the fact that they don't get to deduct their SE income for profit sharing because I believe that puts corporations at an advantage over self employed peple (i.e., S-Corop owners do not pay payroll taxes on the amount of their profit sharing. Any thoughts?

Got a client who is considering trying to get the employees out of the union pension plan. He asked for an estimate of withdrawal liaiblity and the response was that "they don;t have a withdrawal policy at this time." So essentially, they left the door open on them. The Plan also does include a past service credit (they adopted maybe 6 or 7 years ago), which I would think would trigger a withdrawal liability at this stage for sure. Is there any way to compel them to provide a more concrete estimate?

401k eligiblity is immediate. Let's say plan uses sem-annual entry dates to determine whose in the main test. Can you exlcude compensation (and 401k) contriubtions for periods before the Participant became a statutory employee? I had notes somehwere concluding that you could only exclude compensation from a period BEFORE PLAN ENTRY - not from before becoming a statutory employee.

AS "moving expenses". But I want to make sure that it's not just a name...

521 only telss us what deductible expenses are (I took a quick look through as well). Doesn't have a lot of discussion regarding non-deductible expenses. And the definition of deductible expenses would generally be a moot point since it would not be taxable wages anyway... And the exclusion is "moving expenses" - NOT "Moving Expenses as defined by code section 123." It seems to leave the door open for interpretation. Again starting with the assumption that we are discussing non-qualifying moving expenses to begin with (At least if your're using w-2 or current includible).

In order to get a key employee (not a 416 key employee, just an important one!) to move back in-state from a division in another state, the company has agreed to pay off his out-of-state mortgage through a bonus. Can this be considered a "moving expense" which is excludable? We checked the box to exclude taxable fringe benefits, moving expenses, etc. etc.

IU'm confused - if the paerticipant meets the plans definition of total and permanent disability and the plan allows for distribution at this point, then it's not question of employment status any longer. He is eligible for a distriubtion under the disability provisions. And if there is a benefit provided under the plan, then nothing written anywhere will take that benefit anyway. SO for example, if the CBA said "no distributions will be paid upon disaiblity" that the provision would be moot because eliminating that benefit would be a prohibitted cut-back. So I guess you could genralize and say ERISA always wins...

Participant takes a hardship for a home purchase, but the deal falls through. Can the money be re-contribyted? I think not, but in this case it's a decent chunk of change.

That's the one. Only other one I know of is to limit the top-heavy minimum to a few pennies. But yes, in this case, I have an HCE that wants to save for retirement who "only" makes $120K. So he's deferring about 15% of pay. The owner has oodles of money and would prefer to allow this fella to save for retirement. Just warms your heart, doesn't it?

I would be limiting the owner to $1. Thanks Tom!!

When must an amendment be signed to implement this change effective January 1, 2011. In my situation the owner (age 50+) has not made any deferrals. So I should be able to still sign this amendment, correct?

I say use it towards the SHNEC. My lord, it was just a Q&A where they said that!! (assuming your document with a favorable OL/DL allows it--ours does)

But if the plan has a last day rule, and/or there are employees who are not receiving the same deposits during the year, then I'd say you have some problems not unique to partnerships.

When is the 2011 form coming out?? Or are you guys just adding the 2011 date range to the 2010 5500?

We are a TPA shop... Has anyone gone "paperless" yet? I'm just curious to know because it seems a lot of the paper reports could easily be scanned and used by anyone from anywhere, etc. Also, it would make it easier for multiple people to work on the same spreadsheet without having to know what the name of the spreadsheet is. I'm looking for a paperless binder that can store all file types...

They scarcely provided any service at all. In fact it's possible that many of the partners did nothing at all, as administrative responsiblities are relegated to only one or two of them.

Got a partnership (medical practice) where the Docs transfered to a hospital 12/31/09. In 2010 they collected receivables in the old company, but provided only very limited services related to closing down the practice, most of which was being done by third-parties, accountants, etc. Can we do profit sharing for them? They will have box 14A comp.

I agree, today he doesn't want another one. But what about in a year? Or even 6 months?

Bill, I had the same thought. But then let's say for example he wants another loan. Do we let him take it? I suppose the answer is yes because for him, the loan has been repaid via an offset, but I'm a littl iffy on the logistics. But I also like the idea of amending the loan program to allow this. I've definitely read about this type of transaction somewhere so I know it's doable. I'm just a little iffy on the mechanics.

Participant is eligible for an in service distriubtion, and wants to offset his participant loan via an in-service distriubtion without actually taking the money out of the Plan. Can he just fill out an election form to that effcet? I know this is POSSIBLE, but does the document specifically need to allow this form of distribution?

I'm sure the auidoit covered a full 12 months. The confusion relates (presumably( to the fact that the plan was terminated effective 11/30/09, which does NOT create a shprt plan year (at least for 5500 reporting purposes). So if a) you terminated the plan such that no one is eligbile to participate asof 11/30/2009 and b) less than 100 participants have account balances, then you do not need an audit. The employees who elected not to participate (and who terefore have no balances) are no longer considered participants in the plan folloowing the terminaiton date.

GMK, just make sure this new enhancement complies with your document. The way most "payroll to payroll" matches are written, you ONLY look at the deferralsd and comp in that specific pay-period.