austin3515

Can a 3(16) Admin sign discretionary amendments on behalf of a client?

1) Good luck with your employees on that one! 2) Isn't there some regulation or other that basically says if you exploit the rules your plan is disqualified? That's the rule I would be afraid of. The switching on and off and the coordination of the owners contribution to contribute all 401k during the Safe Harbor Plan Years would not pass the smell test. An interesting analogy though is that I know some S-Corps do something similar with the timing of comp on a fiscal year end entity to only pay Social Security taxes every other year. But I was always equally suspicious of that approach even though it has nothing to do with me.

Yup. That would be positively awful advice. But probably a good example to demonstrate how it works. It actually gets quite a bit more complicated than that if you have prior year ADP refunds offset by catch-ups. It is a pain.

Let's say my IT Company charges me $5,000 a month for their services. Due to a mistake I made, I paid them $6,000 a month. You better believe I want my $1,000 back. How is this any dfferent? It should be even more so because as a business owner I'm not burdened by fiduciary status to myself. A Trustee is.

Forgive me for stating the obvious here, but if the engagement letter doesn't address this, then it's a very bad engagement letter. But in the absence of anything to the contrary, without a shred of doubt, the excess MUST be returned to the Plan ASAP and on a frequent basis (quarterly?). I don;t think any other conclusion could be reached. The TPA would just cut a check and deposit the money to a Plan suspense account to be reallocated or to pay other expenses, like an audit. There is no way possible to say "yes I'm getting more than I am entitled to, but I'm holding onto it for the Plan and by the way I'll use it for cash flow purposes."

I mean let's assume the total amount is "reasonable." Perhaps the engagement agreement should just say "Our fees are equal to the revenue sharing." The fiduciary signs it, and then that's that. If they found it reasonable, then it is reasonable barring something completely obnoxious. It is very difficult to assess what a reasonable fee is and therefore very difficult to determine what an unreasonable fee is. I suppose it would likely be similar to the Supreme Court's ruling on profanity, meaning we would know it if we saw it. There are some really pricey TPA's out there though. Just because revenue sharing happens to exceed what your standard formula might be does not make it unreasonable. Again barring something obnoxious, the onus is on the fiduciary. I mean lets face it, in capitalism the goal is to get paid as much for your services as you can. The check on our "greed" is the fiduciary oversight.

Son of a... I was in aisle 6!!

Anyone know?

If I remember this was right when the user fees went through the roof and my client refused to pay the increased user fee. It was a large plan. We ended up doing the "please waive the excise tax approach" to the IRS (which worked).

Thanks for letting me know!

When calculating an RIA's fees, can/should the value of accrued interest on bonds be included in the portfolio value? Is there guidance written anywhere on how to value an account for charging fees?

From 1.401(m)-2. This is the big issue! (iii) Matching contributions. A matching contribution is taken into account in determining the ACR for an eligible employee for a plan year or applicable year only if each of the following requirements is satisfied— (A) The matching contribution is allocated to the employee's account under the terms of the plan as of a date within that year; (B) The matching contribution is made on account of (or the matching contribution is allocated on the basis of) the employee's elective deferrals or employee contributions for that year; and (C) The matching contribution is actually paid to the trust no later than the end of the 12-month period immediately following the year that contains that date.

Ding ding ding. ACP test match contributions are due by the 12/31 following plan year-end. I can't remember if they are included in the following years test or if they are nonelective contributions.

Yes, it is a global setting so it can be enforced on an organization basis. The checkbox on the local software is disabled so the "require recipients to login" is checked and cannot be unchecked.

To be more precise: Sharefile has an option where you can "encrypt" a file and it is replaced with a link to their servers. When the user receives the email with the link, they click the link and are brought to a page that says "Please enter your email address to decrypt this file." . The message itself is NOT encrypted. It is traveling over normal email pathways. Anyone who can access the email itself can unencrypt the file because the credentials are contained within the body of the email, and again, if anyone clicked the link it would say "enter your email to decrypt." No "hacking" required. This is literally no different then sending an email with a password protected spreadsheet, and then in the body of the email tell the recipient what the password is. So are we on the same page that this is not adequate for SS#'s? This is what EMoney is doing (I know this because I use Sharefile with lots of other firms too and have accessed files using this "email validation" method).

Why would it be of no value? The link is in hand, and the credentisals are in hand? This is akin to locking a deadbolt but leaving the key in the keyhole? You agree that if it was snagged in transit, then anyone (including a hacker in North Africa) can access whatever is "encrypted"? All they need is the name or email address, and that is already in the email. Whatsmore, when you click the link it will say "Please enter your email address" so it's not even like they have to be clever about trying to solve a puzzle.

I dont undertand though. Between point A and point b the email istelf is on a dozen different servers and travelling over "public" lines. Anyone can snag the email in transit. In other words, if what you were saying was true, and email could not be snagged in transit, why would we need encryption at all? You would never send an Excel file unencrypted in any way right? Isn;t that because it might be captured in transit? If it can be captured in transit so to can the email (which includes the combination to the lock?).

Are you suggesting that the "enter your name or email address to decrypt" method is acceptable to protect SS#'s? I can't tell from your response...

I can;t figure out why that's even an option. Anyone with the email can access the files. I strongly recommend you require the passwords to open. The email (and thus the key to vault since the email itself includes the credentials (aka their name)) is traveling unencrypted all over the place and can easily be snagged in transit. Maybe its ok for internal financil documents or soemthing, but definitely not for SS#'s and DOB's. I'll bet if you asked Sharefile they would say the same thing I am.

Thats the Office 365 one. It is brilliant. You can either sign in or get a one time code sent that is valid for I believe 10 minutes or something. The problem as you suggested is they have to find an early secure email from you be able to get back in and send something encrypted. Sharefile allows you to upload files through the use of a simple link that we can include in our email signatures (so our clients need only find the last email we sent them).

We use Sharefile and I suppose it is OK, but it is too complicated for a lot of our clients and I presume there must be a better option out there. I'm curious if anyone uses a different system. Sharefile is integrated with Outlook so we can easily encrypt our attachments, AND our clients can upload files directly to our own personal in box. But the password thing is clunky, clients always forget their passwords, etc. Anythng better out there?

Enjoy!

OK, we'll all be waiting with baited breath to see what the response is! I won't be able to make it myself.

The winter virtual one?

Well there is one practical disadvantage. If you're the one calculating it, your client needs to provide you additional information. So I suppose it is more work for you and more work for your client. But if you're goal is to do what's best for your client then that wouldn't be a disadvantage at all! It will save them enough to make it worth the extra 5 minutes of work.