WDIK

By overfunded, do you mean contributions in excess of the plan formula or in excess of the deduction limit? Are you talking about contributions made during the plan year or after the end of the year? What was the cause for the error? What related language is in the plan document? (Topic moved to a more general forum)

http://www.estateplanningforpets.org/faq7.htm http://www.itchmo.com/the-lifestyles-of-su...eficiaries-2590

Some of my thoughts on the matter: 1) To the best of my knowledge, a "Solo K" plan is merely a marketing term used for a 401(k) plan sold to business owners with no employees. 2) It doesn't seem very "solo" to me if the son was also participating, but certainly he should have after meeting the eligibility requirements. 3) As long as there is another participant, the plan must satisfy the bonding requirements. When there are no other participants, the plan is not required to do so.

Employee Stock Purchase Plan.

Point out the applicable section of the plan document to the bundled provider and indicate that you will not amend the filing to show incorrect information.

Okay, we can move on now.

Tom: I thought we had cured you of such things. (As evidenced by the accompanying increased productivity at my office.) P.S. 34 on the first try.

The following previous thread may be of some interest (although it does not deal specifically with a frozen plan). http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=38707

Are you talking about current participants, former participants who still have account balances, former participants who have been paid out, or some combination of the three?

Active participant.

I would not consider this an "informed" opinion, but I would be as surprised as a pig at a bacon reunion party if anything (excepting commision/fee information) on a Schedule A drew any attention at all.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein I recommend following JanetM's advice.

Thank you for not ridiculing my username, avatar, skateboarding prowess or sense of humor.

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=38367

There are those who advocate having the 415 amendments executed prior to the occurence of any 2008 accruals in order to avoid possible anti-cutback issues. For some plans with a 501 hours accrual requirement, this could have been back in March.

If a CPA is asking for a breakdown for deduction purposes, we typically will provide the percentage breakdown based on the individual normal costs. If the employer or a participant is asking for benefit purposes, we will resist providing an "annual" cost and explain for the umpteenth time that defined benefit plans do not work the same as a 401(k) plan. [The second paragraph rarely satisfies those who ask.]

From the IRS website: Under the PPA, separate actuarial information schedules were developed for 2008 plan year filings for single-employer plans (Schedule SB) and multiemployer plans (Schedule MB). The Schedule B thus will not be a valid schedule to file with a plan's 2008 Form 5500 Annual Return/Report. A caution added to the 2007 instructions (see page 4, When To File) advises that filers required to file a Schedule B cannot use the 2007 forms to satisfy their 2008 filing requirements, and that short plan year filers who must file a Schedule SB or Schedule MB and/or a supplemental attachment to Schedule R for 2008 will have an automatic extension to file their complete Form 5500 until 90 days after the 2008 forms are available to use for filing. The Agencies anticipate providing additional guidance in early 2008 for filers affected by these PPA-related changes.

To where were the forfeitures "moved"?

401(a)(17) refers only to annual compensation.

401(a)(17) limits the base compensation, not the base compensation plus excess compensation.

If the 2007 notice is invalidated, wouldn't that create problems since the appropriate participant notice was not issued?

Do that crazy hand jive, Willie!

A small plan was certified for 2007 based on 2006 EOY. The AFTAP was under 90%, so the presumed AFTAP for 2008 restricts lump sum benefit payments. If I understand things correctly, there is currently no provision for a small plan utilizing EOY valuation to certify for 2008, but based on an EOY certification the AFTAP would exceed 80%. How would the plan go about terminating and distributing lump sums? Is that even a consideration until further guidance and/or technical corrections are available?

The following thread was quite a while back. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=15637