WDIK

I know I am due to update my vision prescription, but the two listed names look the same to me.

Simply as a point of clarification, the name of the church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

It is both the first and final return. I check both boxes in this situation.

I would not think so. Most plans probably do have a participant count greater than zero on day 1.

Wouldn't if be hard to complete line 11a of the EZ if there were no SB?

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/apply-for-an-employer-identification-number-ein-online

While there may be a concern with a possible disparity in potential earnings between the NHCEs and HCEs if deposits are not made proportionally throughout the year, I am not aware of any requirement that a single deposit must satisfy benefits testing.

Do they get fries with that? Thanks for adding value to the discussion. No offense was intended. I think that hidden within this statement is really the underlying aspect of this whole discussion. What is the perceived value of something? For some, my original post may have been of value because it added some levity to the conversation. For others, it may have added value to the discussion by highlighting the possible dichotomy of being able to provide services that include everything while seeking for insight on some fairly routine procedures for pension professionals. For still others, it added no value because it did not address a desired question or was perceived as a belittling comment. Similarly, some may see little value in paying fees for certain services because they prefer to the take the associated risks or assume little or no risk will exist. Others see a greater value in paying the fees to a seasoned professional due to the peace of mind they will have. To each his own.

Do they get fries with that?

Suppose you were approached by a prospective client shortly before the April 30th deadline to prepare a PPA restatement. Further suppose you discover that an EGTRRA restatement does not exist. Would you: 1) Quickly prepare the PPA document and have it signed timely. Then subsequently prepare the EGTRRA document and submit as a nonamender. 2) Not worry about the PPA deadline, prepare both documents and submit as a nonamender. 3) Have a different suggestion. Your opinions are appreciated.

Sample from a pre-approved document: 20.5 QDRO Distributions. Benefits payable pursuant to a Qualified Domestic Relations Order are distributable as selected below. (a) [ ] Such benefits cannot be distributed until the affected Participant has reached the Earliest Retirement Age (b) [ ] Such benefits can be distributed at any time (even if the affected Participant has not yet reached the Earliest Retirement Age)

It was a letter for one of our clients, not the sample letter.

I have read a copy of one such letter from the DOL.

We have already been contacted by a significant number of our clients regarding this notice. Of course the client doesn't understand that this is a reminder notice and starts stressing out about a 12/31/2013 deadline or a missed deadline or a new filing requirement. Thanks IRS.

Don't third-party-administrators provide the services you are looking for?

At some point in my career, I must have crossed a some sort of "personal-mistake-threshold", because I don't get nearly as worked up about situations like this as I used to.

Is there a way to jump to new posts within a thread you have already read, rather than having to start at the top again?

We had a similar situation recently. The premium division of the PBGC continued to send premium notices and would not remove the client from their system until the standard termination division told them the plan was closed. The standard termination divison would not close the plan until they received Form 501. No other explanations or requests seemed to suffice.

There is merit to the advisor's suggestion based on the limited information provided.

Reduce the loan fee by $7 and stop stressing.

The level to which a TPA questions a client's actions is inversely proportional to the level of responsibility a TPA wants to take when the client's actions go awry.

I think the issue is with the document. Since you can't retroactively elect to defer, the deferral provision of the plan should show an effective date later than the adoption date.

Please explain this word "profit". It is unfamiliar to me.

All suggestions are appreciated.

I'm not sure that the need to re-enroll for elective deferral purposes could be used as an argument to invalidate a participation waiver, since, as Tom points out, "a 'one-time election' is not treated as a deferral election".