austin3515

Can anyone point me to a good article? I have a client who wants more information.

I still don't like it. Let's talk about severance. The argument of "they would have received the pay had their employment continued" has been made many times even about severance. "If my employment had continued, I would have been paid for those 10 weeks!" I know we have all heard that argument from people and "batted" it down and said no no no, the comp was never earned. I am sorry I just do not see any material difference between 2 weeks notice refused but with payment provided, versus 2 weeks of severance with an involuntary termination. They are both essentially involuntary terminations with salary continuation. I guess I'm going to stop posting about this now though...

Well, isn;t the question "can you use it in the first place"? If it is "severance" it is not legal to use it. I would be curious to see what the language you are referring to actually says.

She used to work their full-time so is legitimately eligible.

I disagree with the conclusion, I think it is severance. When you get paid unused sick time, you're getting pay for the days you worked. It just so happens you didn't take the time off you were entitled to and instead worked. In this case, no work is performed for the 2 weeks pay. The rationale of "the pay would have been received had the employee continued" is not what they are referring to. They are referring to pay that was earned before severance. e.g., commissions, performance bonuses, final paychecks, paid time off. The mere fact that that the employee wrote down on a piece of paper "I'll work if you want" is not materially different from the employer terminating the employee with no notice and paying them 2 weeks severance. Does anyone change their mind?

Princess, the key word you used, which the IRS has discussed as well, is that it is "treated" as earned. IT is not actually earned. By my clock you still have 3 days to eliminate the last day rule. But remember, amendments must satisfy nondiscrimination so if the only one to benefit is the partner, then (assuming he is an HCE?) you are outa luck. P.S. Is 401king your father? Ha ha ha

So the wife comes in for the afternoon to answer the phones and instead of contributing $5,000 hubby contributes $10,000? It just seems rough... Hey it's a great answer if it works, but I'd be sweating it a little on audit...

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/directive.pdf Does anyone think this "Carol Gold" memo about abuses involving short-term employees would apply to the owner's spouse working a "few days" solely to have her included in the ADP test as a zero? I'm trying to find a reason why it is wrong because it just doesn't feel right. They would be the only two HCE's so it effectively doubles what the HCE can contribute.

In my experience the investment provider has known that the investor is a qualified account so I've not had to deal with that, but good to know!

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php/topic/59917-withholding-on-retirement-plan-distributions-945-deposits/?hl=penchecks#entry265615

In what way? I have lots of pooled accounts, no separate EIN's and I've never heard of any issues?

But why bother? It's not yet required on the 5500. You can use the sponsors EIN for 5500 filings. Perhaps it is a withholding issue?

Never mind my document does have provisons regarding the excess occurring in "this plan" - it's just way at the end. I couldn't find a way to delete this post... OK I guess you can delete posts and not topics.

My plan document seems only to have distributions for the situation where the participant make 401k contributions in more than one plan. And EPCRS seems only to address missing the 4/15 deadline. So where do I turn for correction in this situation?

Anyone?

Let me get this straight, you would take the position that, as the situation has been described, there is a chance in "H E double hockey stick" that the DOL will conclude this is timely? I thought it was very clear that thou shall ignore the outside window in the regulations.

6 months ago I would have said "calculate lost interest and call it a day." But since then I have receive 3 letters from the DOL pressing clietns about 3 miniscule late deposits reported on their Schedule H. So at least until Trump takes office ( ) and changes the policy, I would say talk to a professional about doing a Voluntary Fiduciary Correction Program filing, which is the DOL's program to fix just the sort of thing. It's really not THAT bad, although it is definitely disproportionate to the error (and bigly!).

I have a client who set up a ROBS (don't worry, I have disclaimers all over the place in my engagement letter, and lengthy emails each year about how risky it is) and I need to know the easiest way to get a cheap valuation to enable them to check the box that all assets were determined by an independent third-party appraiser. I know there are internet services out there for a few hundred dollars. Anyone had any direct experiences on this?

PenChecks of course is different then PayChex. And PenChecks can do JUST the whithhodling deposit. They will also do the 1099. If you have pooled or FBO distibutions and you're struggling with all of this, this will "change your life." The process is: Have the investment holder send a check to PenChecks and reference your clients Plan Number (which you would have from setting them up on PenChecks). Enter the payee's elections on the website and the payment amount. PenChecks will match up the distribution you entered with the funds received and sends out the check to the participant, remits the withholding and does the 1099, all for $35. And I do not work on commission!

I have a very very very simple solution: PenChecks. Call them. All of this will go away. So easy... http://www.penchecks.com/

Who's in the Doghouse!! He made a very interesting observation, which is that if his "business' " primary purpose is providing management services to 1 other business, then it is an Affiliated Service Group (the Management Company variety) and he would be employed. Of course no one has mentioned it, but if this CFO is earning his paycheck exclusively from providing CFO services to this one "client" (aka his employer) then he is a w-2 employee and they could be in hot water if challenged. For example, why the sudden change in status? But that is really the CPA's call, but I always mention to clients in these situations.

My document (and I presume almost all pre-approved documents) include this provision in the ADP testing language. Are you sure the basic plan document doesn't include this language? On mine it is buried in the Basic Plan Document.

There is nothing preventing you from establishing compliance with 410(b) by way of the Average Benefits Test. [Full disclosure: This response was plagiarized].

I am assuming taxed as a partnership although never explicitly stated. If a w-2 bonus it is obviously comp in year paid. As someone already suggested, there is no such thing as a "bonus" to partners. They get guaranteed payments. If the CPA counts the January payment as a guaranteed payment for the applicable plan year (even though it wasn't paid) then that's not your concern. It is Self Employment income (Box 14A on K-1) and so it is eligible wages. Just make sure the deferral election was (will be?) signed BEFORE 12/31. With respect to the accrual of GP's paid after 12/31: https://ttlc.intuit.com/questions/2892389-multi-member-partnership-guaranteed-payment-questions-with-an-accrual-accounting-do-they-have-to-add-the-last-two-weeks-of-2014-as-money-paid-to-the-k-1-but-paid-in-2015 Note that this assumes the partnership is on the accrual basis of accounting.

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-16-16.pdf Well no one really addressed the question. I skimmed through this and there several prohibitions and requirements for MID YEAR changes. I see nothing at all regarding any restrictions whatsoever regarding changes before beginning of the Plan Year. I would be curious to see if others have a different take on it? And 12/1 is definitely NOT a deadline for distributing the notice - not in the same way that the 5500 is due by 7/31 or 10/15. Not saying it is the best practice but $#!t happens sometimes and I'm not afraid to go there! [edited this last paragraph]