WDIK

Can a Form 5500-EZ be filed?

1) The same potential penalties apply. 2) You are ineligible for the DFVCP. 3) Your best hope is to present your case in writing, plead for abatement of the penalties, and hope for the best. A search of these forums using the terms "tear-stained letter" or "failure to file" may offer some additional advice.

I think that would be classified as a leap of faith interpretation.

I was corrected on that line of thinking several years ago. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=24725

I have found Accudraft's services to be adequate, but not outstanding.

No.

I think this might be one of those situations where I can make the client happy by doing as they request, because it doesn't really seem like a big deal either way.

Under what provision of the plan document would the course of action you describe fall?

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=32676

Does anyone still sell a bond at the $1,000 level?

If the plan covers only the owner and the owner's spouse, it is not subject to the bonding requirements. If a former employee has an account balance, the plan would be covering individuals in addition to the ower and the owner's spouse, so the bonding requirements would still be applicable.

I agree with what logic has told you.

I believe that it is effective for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2007. See Section 1103 of PPA.

Find another who can.

Even if there were no HCEs, I would still take issue with the TPA's alleged statement that the test "is more likely to pass than not."

No.

Who let Yankee out?

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=34839

Do you sponsor some type of retirement or welfare plan? Are the employees eligible participants in said plan?

Also 3%.

This depends on whether or not you have met the requirements for accruing (or earning a right to) a benefit for the period in question. Normally, the requirement would be to have worked a certain number of hours and/or be employed at the end of the year. The specifics would be contained in your plan document and adoption agreement. I'm sorry that Charles Schwab does not seem to be able to address this issue, but it will need to be someone that has reviewed the pertinent plan language.

http://benefitsattorney.com/modules.php?na...wpage&pid=1

When speaking about coverage, safe-harbor can mean something different that the term as it applies to the 401(k) contributions that allow a plan to avoid ADP testing. Please clarify what you mean by safe harbor.

In addition to JanetM's comment, your confusion may be coming from one of the cautions in the Form 5500 instructions. This caution refers to the fact that Puerto Rico plans should only use Code 3C when there is no election made under section 1022(i)(2). If an election was made for a Puerto Rico plan then Code 3C does not apply. This caution does not, however, preclude Code 3C from applying to other types of plans besdies a Puerto Rico plan.

Certainly there was sense involved during the creation of regulations such as this. It is just that those individuals involved in the process are of such elite caliber that the sense used is not common.