austin3515

Mind. Blown.

S or C corps? That has not ever come up before. They are C-Corps though.

10 Docs own MD Practice, Inc. Those same 10 Docs own "Surgery Center Holdings, Inc." which in turn owners 60% of "The Surgery Center, Inc.". The other 40% is owned by an unrelated hospital. Each Doc owns 10% of MD Practice and Surgery Center Holdings. Here is my question. MD Practice Inc. would be the A-Org and The Surgery Center, Inc. would be the FSO. Does the A-Org Satisfy the requirement that it have an ownership interest? I presumed the answer would be yes and set out to find the justification but came up empty handed. In order for a corporation itself to be treated as owning somenthing that is owned by a shareholder, that shareholder has to own at least 50% of the corporation. So it seems to me MD Practice, Inc. is not treated as owning any part of Surgery Center Holdings, Inc. and tehrefore does not meet the requisite ownership interest. Make no mistake, my question is "What am I missing?" This has to be an ASG.

The other scenario two (presumably Facebooks) is a plan where there is a huge passing margin on the ACP test AND there are "hundrends" of HCEs so that if just one of them does a lot of after-tax it will have a muted affect on the testing. The reality is of course that for most HCE's it is likely a stretch even to do the $19,000/$26,000, so even if available only a handful would put the pedal to the metal so to speak...

And while an impeachment trial is underway! Well played, well played!

Sorry about that. Mimecast is some email protection thing we use. I reposted the link it should work now!

No need to yell at ESOP guy!

If something doesn't say it is irrevocable, then it is revocable. That's why certain legal documents include the word irrevocable in the first place. The document says it is discretionary. The document is not amended to make it mandatory merely because someone makes a decision to exercise their discretion a certain way even if that decision was made in a Board Resolution. That's how I see it anyway!

What does MEC out mean?

[edited to fix link] https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidrae/2018/09/20/rich-person-roth/#4b7ddee471fe Whenever I read "backed by life insurance" I just think used car sales man. Is this legit? I have a client who is doing this.

Fortunately for me this is a solo 401k. But contributions are discretionary so my understanding on the matter is even if declared a contribution it is not irrevocable even if participants lose out. I had a plan once many years ago where profit sharing was allocated and participant statements were distributed. Plan sponsor fell on hard times and had no money and the ERISA attorney we consulted said no problem to take it away because it is discretionary. PR nightmare notwithstanding.

Do you know if that would cover the substantial risk of forfeiture issue on a 457f? and thank you!!

Employer A deducts a $10,000 profit sharing contribution on his 2018 1120. The contribution was inadvertently never deposited, and is just being discovered now. Is there any way to "Cure" the deduction or is the only option to amend 2018 to remove the deduction and pay the new taxes?

What are the considerations regarding terminating a 457(f) Plan. I am obviously aware that we need to be concerned with presumption of a substantial risk of forfeiture. Are there guidelines? Let's say for example scenario A) is the organization voluntarily terminates the Plan; and scenario B) is the organization is actually ceasing operations (perhaps because they lost their primary grant). These are hypotheticals, but I am curious to know what the rules are concerning terminating one of these things.

There is no deferral election. The Organization is contributing an employer contribution of $10,00 a quarter in my example. The first quarter is 3/31/2020, and the last I suppose could theoretically be 12/31/2025. The question is, is substantial risk of forfeiture applied to each deposit separately (in which case the latest contriubtions seem problematic) or can it be applied to the scheme as a whole, in which case there is a clear substantial risk of forfeiture. Hopefully what I'm driving at is clear enough...

I understand that the IRS position is that amounts are not subject to a substantial risk of forfeiture if the future service is less than 2 years. So lets say all contriubtions made between 2020 and 2025 will vest on 12/31/2025. What about contributions that accrued during 2024 and 2025? I can;t find anything that addresses this precise scenario. Obviously overall there is a significant risk of forfeiture with this arrangement. But is there a significant risk with respect to the 2024 and 2025 contributions? Has the IRS ever addressed this? I think in practice this is quite common because "cliff vesting" is quite common.

The point I'm trying to make is, where is the rule itself? I have yet to see the text of the rule itself which should include effective dates, etc.

CB Zeller, this is insanely awesome... Can someone point me to the actual rules that specify this with special effective dates, etc.?

Does anyone know the answer to the question regarding anyone whose first RMD is due for the 2020 distribution year? Does that person have to take an RMD? Assume they are 5% owner and 70.5 but not 72. I assume the answer is no, but I know enough to know that the details are critical.

Thank you, I'm vesting and paying out on essentially the same day. Good point though!

Well not yet... And there's probably 20 users. The benefit of Access is (if you know how to use it) you can mold it to your operations/processes as opposed to the other way around. It's pretty darn powerful. We're pretty much at the point where we need to be upgrading the backend to a SQL server, but it would hurt to let it go. Interestingly when I was in public accounting we use ProSystem FX Engagement (it was ePace at the time) and that was actually the template I had in my head for my Access thing. There is something to be said for using a mainsteam program. Thanks everyone!

Deferred comp plan provides that benefits accrued will vest based on a rolling vesting schedule. The sponsor and the Participants want the money to become vested if the sponsor is bought. Any words of advice and/or caution?

What are people doing for paperless binder solutions? i.e.. saving all of the workpapers... We currently have an Access program that we are using but may be outgrowing it.

" I understand that the new process requires a declaration be signed by the applicant" I think that's the point of the requirement of the applicant to sign a "under penalty of perjury" statement. That's the declaration you are referring to. But I'm glad you bumped this up, we're doing ours in a week or so, and would love to see some more talk!

You are free to speculate