WDIK

I agree with your interpretation of the 80-120 Participant Rule. Once the participant count exceeds 120 you must file as "large plan." You can once again file as a "small plan" if the participant count drops below 100.

The entity sponsoring the retirement plan should have an identification number. It is also appropriate to have a separate tax identification number for the trust. Other that these two numbers, I am not aware of any other requirements.

It also seems that you are having difficulty convincing a number of others (based on my interpretation of their comments), including: maverick, mbozek, pax, the ERISA Outline, and Appleby. I'll also include myself in this category. Death and taxes makes an interesting point if a direct rollover is elected and the fee is taxable.

You might start here.

Plan administrators are elgibile to use the DFVC Program if the required filings are made prior to written notification by the DOL of a falure to file a timely annual report. Suppose that a timely filing is made, but it is incomplete/incorrect in that the plan was not exempt from the audit requirement as originally thought. Can DFVCP be used?

I don't understand why you are "leaning towards $200,000" if your ADP/ACP section "references to 'Compensation' which is limited to $170,000".

If I follow your post correctly, the plan satisfies the top heavy minimum contribution requirement since all non-key employees are receiving a 3% employer contribution. This is true whether or not the key employees get the 3%contribution. Apparently the plan document indicates that the top heavy contribution only needs to be made to non-keys, and you have satisfied that requirement.

Prior "spirited" discussion.

Instructions for Form 5500-EZ state (in bold), "Do not enter your Social Security Number."

I think you will find in previous threads that this point has a number of opponents as well as proponents. Yes, but I think the concern centers around whether group designation has some justifiable basis or is arbitrary or difficult to define. What does it mean to be negatively impacted by freezing the defined benefit plan? Is it possible to interpret this to mean everyone, since they no longer are receiving accruals? Did the board make the choice based on actuarial methodology, personal relationships or some other method?

Agreed. Sorry about the brain cramp on the definition of primary. I'm not sure why I read it the way I did.

On what basis did the board of directors determine who was negatively impacted?

This is my logic (fire at will): 1) The constructive ownership rules indicate, in part, that "tock owned, directly or indirectly, by or for a trust...shall be considered as owned by its beneficiaries in proportion to the actuarial interest of such beneficiaries in such trust." [section 318(a)(2)(B)(i)] 2) An assumption is made, although not stated explicitely in your post, that John and Mary are husband and wife. 3) John and Mary Smith as beneficiaries are considered owners. The percentage of ownership depends on their interest in the trust. The use of the term "primary beneficiaries" leads me to believe that there are other beneficiaries who may also be considered owners. 4) Since John and Mary do not "own" the entire business, they are not eligible to file Form 5500-EZ. 5) A Form 5500 must be filed. 6) A fidelity bond is required.

Is the answer to you question the same as that to the question "Must Form 5500 be filed?"

See Revenue Procedure 2003-44. Some prior threads may also be of assistance. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=23348 http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=23243

Try the instructions for Form 990-T, line 36. (Page 13 in the 2003 instructions)

Kirk: I think you may be getting in a rut. For the month of June, 15.4% of your posts consist solely of the quoted phrase. This is up significantly from the months of April and May where only 4.3% of your posts consisted soley of the quoted phrase.

I did not get the same impression from reading the post. Perhaps some clarification from AshleyL would be appropriate.

Okay penman, I give. Is Partly Cloudy your secret identity or alter ego?

Just curious, but why the assumption that an extension is not an option?

From the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 4) BLACKOUT PERIOD- For purposes of this subsection, the term `blackout period', with respect to the equity securities of any issuer-- (A) means any period of more than 3 consecutive business days during which the ability of not fewer than 50 percent of the participants or beneficiaries under all individual account plans maintained by the issuer to purchase, sell, or otherwise acquire or transfer an interest in any equity of such issuer held in such an individual account plan is temporarily suspended by the issuer or by a fiduciary of the plan; and

Are you certain that the investment firm will not accept written or verbal direction from the participant? It would seem logical that there is some sort of backup system.

Bill Summary and Status

You may be referring to additional information needed to maintain the exemption from the small plan audit requirement when nonqualified assets exceed 5% of total assets.

This thread may also be of interest to you, Jeff1.