MoShawn

I would think you would use the rates the participants elected/were defaulted to. Treat it as a failure to implement an election rather than a failure to give an opportunity to elect.

Does the document specify that match forfeitures must be used to reduce match, or just "employer contributions"?

FWIW, I always interpreted this portion: For purposes of the minimum required allocation set forth above, the percentage allocated to the Account of any Key Employee who is a Participant shall be equal to the ratio of the sum of the Employer contributions (excluding any Catch-Up Contributions) allocated on behalf of such Key Employee for the Plan Year divided by the 415 Compensation for such Key Employee for the Plan Year. To refer specifically to this statement: However, if (1) the sum of the Employer contributions allocated to the Participant's Account of each Key Employee for such Top-Heavy Plan Year is less than three percent (3%) of each Key Employee's 415 Compensation The entire first paragraph is describing how to arrive at the "minimum required allocation set forth above". This sentence clarifies that when doing part (1) you must include the deferrals of Key employees in determining whether or not a Key has exceeded 3% of compensation.

Present both options, with pros and cons. Get a decision in writing. I had a similar question recently. I just cannot get beyond the math. 0/0 does not = 0. As you said, it is imaginary math.

1) First distribution calendar year is 2013. He must receive the first RMD by 4/1/14. If he delays into 2014, he would need to take a second RMD by 12/31/14 for 2014. 2) No. You cannot mix RMD's from an IRA with a 401(k).

Yeah, yeah, call me paranoid...

Doh! Good case of adjusting the facts to protect the innocent, and in the process changing the situation entirely... Actually terminated at age 58, thus the interest in the exception.

I had a question relating to the age 55 exception come up just this morning. Participant age 60 terminates employment. Due to a testing failure, he receives $2,000 and a Form 1099-R with tax code 8. Subsequently, it is determined that the correction should only have been $1,500. Currently he has 1 Form 1099-R with a code 8 for $2,000. Assuming he does not return the money to the plan, we will amend the Form 1099-R to be code 8 for $1,500 and issue another with a code 2 for $500. Doesn't this represent the same tax position, either way? In both instances, $2,000 is includable in income and nothing is subject to the 10% early withdrawal penalty.

One of the express exceptions to the mid-year amendment rule for Safe Harbors is to add hardships, I believe.

I have also followed the path of using the 2012 ADP as a benchmark to correct, then going back and doing a true-up once the 2013 ADP is known.

I think a bit of both. We are going to try to convince them that 2 per semester is not unreasonable. I think I studied for 2-3 weeks at the most for the one I took this spring.

Unfortuntely, my company only allows 1 module at a time...one module down (dist & loans), three years to go...

Here is the situation: A money purchase pension plan failed to make contributions for 2008 for a participant due to a payroll coding error. This was discovered in 2012 and corrected according to EPCRS. Auditor is suggesting that we may need to file Schedule G, Part III for Nonexempt Transactions. Is this correct? I have never before heard of a Sch G being filed for a case of missed contributions.

I would still follow the process BG5150 stated before. Using the DOL VFCP calculator, you are looking at about $8.50 in lost earnings, which would be about $1 in excise tax on Form 5330. If you have a copy of Form 5330 (along with the check) and proof of deposit of the lost earnings you should be fine, even under DOL audit. Unless there are more details here that we haven't heard yet, I don't think there is any reason to do a full VFCP submission. The class exemption may get you out of the excise tax, but if that is only going to be $1 then why waste the man-hours.

Why not just deposit missed earnings and pay the excise tax on Form 5330? I wouldn't think VCP is necessary, and VFCP is voluntary. All it does is prove to the DOL that you corrected and gets you a no-action letter.