austin3515

Plan sponsor terminated it's sole employee. Only remaining employees are partners. Sole employee takes a distriubtion in 2017. I assume I can just start filing a 5500-SF as a 1 participant plan, correct?

Reamortize to be repaid within original 5 year window. We just don;t have a great excuse for why it wasn't repaid. Essentially he had no money and was paying off other things.

Can people share success rats for a VCP for an owner's loan (owns 50% of the business)? Suffice it to say, the participant did not make the majority of payments in the first year, so "way behind."

Perfect, thanks!

but even for a new plan, the audit is determined on the first day of the Plan year, correct? I know I'm thinking top-heavy rules here, but thought I would check! As an aside, they could have waived eligiblity for anyone employed on 1/2nd!

A lot of recordkeepers are starting to talk about Student Loan repayment programs. Anyone have any articles they've read about what these things are? Clients seem to get really excited about these things but I can't seem to figure out what they do/how they work. From what I gather employers can do payroll deductions/matches (the latter of which is taxable) and then faciliate payments to lending institutions? Very curious to know what you guys know!

That seems to be what the regs say, they explicitly in plain English carve out brother/sister. You do have to scratch your head and wonder what the heck they were thinking in treating your paragraphs 2 and 3 any differently since they are essentially the SAME.

Well, partnerships really never own corporations in the samll business world (never ever say never). Hmmm... How about a 1040 Schedule C guy who also owns 70% of a partnership? One limit or tow? How about if it was a corporation? Seems like there is a trap for the unwary somewhere! For example, in my example in my prior post, would the ownership of one company be attributed tot he other thus resulting in a parent sub relationship after attribution. You get the idea.

Great example of why this seems so strange...

Belgarath, so some guy owns 70% of 2 businesses, there are 2 separate 415 limits for 2 separate plans (assume no overlap in ownership on the other 30)? I looked at the regs and it sure does seem that way. It seems to me that at least in the small business world, where frankly we don't see parent/sub relationships, this rule is "almost" moot.

Can I do an amendment today to make eligiblity in a safe harbor plan immediate without the need to provide 30 days notice? I say yes, because 2016-16 says the new notice period does not apply unless we are changing information in the required content of the SH Notice, and eligibility is not required content. All those in favor, say "Aye!"

TPAPril, this thread was written a whole world ago. Are you familiar with IRS Notice 2016-16? It should address your question, and yes there is a re-notice requirement. I just wanted to make sure you knew the whole framework of this conversation is night and day from the thread above. https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/mid-year-changes-to-safe-harbor-401k-plans-and-notices

Has anyone seen auditors making any disclosures about this in their financial statements? http://www.great-westclassaction.com/

Ahh, but such a plan could be housed at a recordkeeper. Different animal altogether from the OP, I think. I have pooled plans with 10s of millions and hundreds of participants.

Well that;s not necessarily a fair question. I have a pooled plan with $500,000, but $475,000 is the owners... And just the owner is on the investmetn committee. My historical experience is that most employees have very little interest in that sort of thing.

But just filling in the blanks would work, right? What is the amount? Select $ amount or percentage. Adjusted for gains, yes or no. IT seems to me that there are not so many variables. Heck if one of you wants to draft the check the box QDRO perhaps you could make some money off of it!

Running a daily val shop is something we have, with good reason, avoided like the plague...

I have always thought a possible way to do it would be a check the box QDRO, like a prototype docyument. That way my task is ministerial. The prototype QDRO would of course be prepared by an attorney. So not dissimilar from what I do on my plan documents. What do people think about that?

Let's not forget to mention the old Vanguard small business platform. That thing was a dream and a go-to. Was real sorry to see that go, had to be 5 or 6 years now. That's when we switched those plans over to Fidelity Non-prototype or Investment only accounts.

I'm telling you, don;t underestimate the pooled plan. I get people to do it almost every time for the micro start-ups. There just is no plan B (no pun intended). For those of you who say "Forget it too much liabiility, you're forgetting that no money = no liability. A $100,000 pooled plan, or even $200,000 would have really any liabiility even with a bad fund.

Check out Fidelity Non-Prototype if you're going to go that way as a non-advisor. It's decent bear bones stuff but that's all you need.

So let's say I wanted to provide this service. I am not a lawyer. You're saying I could either 1) have an engagement letter with the attorney representing one of the divorcee's and provide the QDRO for their review OR 2) Prepare the QDRO for the divorcee directly but provide it to then explicitly for review by their divorce attorney. Is that about right? Heck it seems to me I could work with an attorney on an awesome QDRO template and just tweak it each time. Just curious...

To draft a QDRO? I get that a lot of stuff that we do the lines get blurred. for example, perhaps complicated language in the other field of a volume submitter document, or perhaps requesting language changes to a QDRO for clarification. I don;t know why I feel like drafting a QDRO goes over that line, but I think it's because a judge ends up signing the document. Thoughts?

I've been successfully selling pooled plans in these situations. Participant direction is just not cheap, that's the bottom line. Then they grow into a participant directed platform. Advisor's put the whole plan generally in just one single balanced-type fund. P.S. the balances are by definition small. AFRKD service was just too good to make any money on a $100,000 plan.

I make intelligent mistakes very infrequently - but stupid mistakes I make once a day...