austin3515

Bird's on the money here... The only economic difference (as someone said earlier) is the double taxation of the interest paid in. For the purpose of analysis you have to assume the same rate of return. Presumably, on a risk adjusted basis, the expected rates of return will always be equal anyway.

Yes, if taxed as a corp., then treat it like a corp for all purposes. So if the owner gets a W-2 from the corp., he can defer from those wages. Even if the CORP lost money (i.e., because the corp is a distinct entity, where as a partner in a partnership is not).

No formal election. Those rules can be avoided by design. Make sure elect NOT to disregard rollovers in determining the cash-out provisions.

Is he taxed as Corproation or a Partnernship? There is some controversy on these boards regarding whether or not an LLC taxed as a partnership can give the owner W-2 wages. My opinion is that if your a partner or self employed, you don't get a W-2, your income is the income of the business. So if the partnership has losses, you have no income from which to defer. I think the majority agrees with this, but we shall see! But if your being taxed as a corporation, none of that matters. W-2 wages are wages from which you can contribute 401(k). Now if your taxed as a partnerhsip, but receiving a W-2, you're in unchartered waters - at least the IRS has not chartered them to the best of my knowledge...

Long as there's no nonelective money, yes. That incldudes reallocated PS forfeitures (i.e, if there are any reallocated PS forfeitures, your subject to TH).

The point is to get in trust because the money is then more secure, i.e, because once the money is in trust to take it out for the employer's own use is ver very bad. That's like embezzlement! At least a PT... Much different than delaying the deposit of the deferrals to play the float... Also, the protection of the fdielit bond is availalbe if the trustee does steal it.

I couldn't disagree more. The law is the law, and if you can segregate it once a week, you better deposit once a week. The point is that if your TPA's fees do NOT impact when YOU can segregate. It's worth noting that I have heard Dingwall himself say that depositing to a checking out each week, w/monthly allocations is fine. He doesn't even care if it's interest bearing. He just wants the money out of the grubby, untrustworthy paws of the plan sponsor.

Anyone have a link to where that is in print? Like a Q&A posted on ASPA's page or something?

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=23366&hl= http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?s...opic=23509&st=0

http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/Title_29/Par...R2530.203-2.htm

There are at least a few posts on these boards about leaving anyone with zero comp out of the testing. Try doing a seach for "0 compensation" or "no compensation."

I think you would need a PT exemption from the DOL. I think they'll want to weigh in on the rate of interest used. They'd probably go for it though, seeing as how they generally don't like er stock in the Plan.

None taken

Janet - A dull and thick day for you is still a pretty damn good day... I was confused, but after Midas' post I'm straight again (thank goodness).

So if this is a stock deal, A can still terminate the Plan before acquisition, and allow distributions? I think you just responded to an asset deal. I'm curious if your opinion changes if it's a stock deal. It sounds like it wouldn't, but hey ya never know!

You could therefore end up with 2 years of vesting service in 15 months (i.e., if they work 1,000 in the "unamended" plan year, and in the 12 months prior to the end of the short plan year-check Tom's site as this will clarify what I mean.

two words (or one?): anti-cutback. No dice... The question really is it your problem? I suppose BEFORE receiving payment you could resign as TPA (via a letter sent with certified mail). Then I can't see how it's your problem, but like Kirk I'm not an ERISA attorney...

I think he's saying he tested with bad data...

Does anyone know of a model that will assist in determining how much a profit-sharing contribution should be optimize the tax benefit to the principals? The variables I can think of would be: 1) Marginal tax rate (i.e., how much do I save in taxes for each additional dollar contributed) 2) Valuing the impact of deferral of capital gains taxes, and the impact of taxing as ordinary income versus capital gains income. I guess you would need to know years to retirement as well? 3) Amounts allocated to employees. So it seems to me that perhaps someone has put together a model that at least attempts to address some of these issues. Has anyone seen anything like it?

I should've been more clear that my answer is based on the assumption that the doc. says the match is based on annual data, not pay-period data.

I think your thinking of the correction programs. I wouldn't get involved with those rules unless you had a problem. What your talking about is routine plan administration, and you should try to follow your document to a very close degree to stay out of trouble. That includes an annual true-up. I'd set the bar real low to avoid benefit rights and features problems (i.e., HCE's will likely have the largest adjustments).

separate deduction limit Watch out when people transfer from one employer to another, or if they work for both, as you need to give credit for service with both.

I'll correct anything over .10, because why not? You're cutting a check anyway. If you have a daily valued plan the investment provider shouldn't care because the data is via spreadsheet, etc.

THANKS!!!

Rephrased: Actually, the employer could CHOOSE TO NOT provide any benefits to union employees and rich benefits to non union employees and still pass discrimination tests. Participation in the multi doesn't matter. If you read the rest of her comments it's quite clear that this is what she means.