BG5150

Does the participant have a history of paying his brother some sort of rent?

1. Right 2. I would think they are 2016 contributions, subject to the 2016 Annual Additions limit. Is this a large-plan filer? Is it a lot of money? If large plan, I would jsut add a footnote to the 2016 audit if it's an insigificant amount. As an SF, I'd just add it as a 2016 contribution, b/c that's the year it's deductible for. (see my "thought" in #2.)

Remind them that the accounts "belong" to the trust. The Trustee is just allowing them limited control by allowing them to direct the assets in the segregated account under the trust as a whole.

About the withdrawal: these are trust accounts, and the Trustee should have the say of who can and cannot take their money. It should be up to the Plan Administrator to follow prudent plan policies as to what is needed to make a distribution. If the Trustee is satisfied with those policies and is confident they have been followed, it should approve the withdrawal.

I know some companies send out annual "let us know if you want to change your deferral %" correspondence to everyone. I'm guessing some of them have "you are deferring x%. Let us know if you want it changed."

Let me put this another way. I need to do corrections to some accounts and using actual earnings is not reasonable. Does anyone have a spreadsheet rubric to make a reasonable effort to calculate the earnings? I have developed a formula using the excess contribution earnings calculator from the IRS Pub. 590. Does anyone have anything different? Or better?

Can the person prove that HR received the election in good order?

Your personal liability should be covered by your employers E&O

If you are "considered the plan administrator for certain functions", then you have probably already taken on some liability for which you could be personally held accountable. That's the POINT to being a 3(16) Plan administrator. You agree to take on the RESPONSIBILITY and the LIABILITY that comes with the various functions. It is more than just an administrative convenience for you to approve distributions and monitor payroll. If you are truly concerned about the exposure, perhaps you should not have entered the 3(16) "space" to begin with. I would immediately seek ERISA counsel to determine what your liability is and assess your risk tolerance thereto.

The EPCRS correction for an excess allocation is to remove the funds (plus earnings) and put them in a "unallcoated account." (I call it a "suspense account") NOTE: It does not say anything about "forfeiting" the money or putting it into a "forfeiture account." It further goes one to say that the ER cannot make any contributions as long as there are funds in the suspense account. That means the next ER contrib will be offset by the amount in the suspense account. Section 6.06 (2) Nor does it say anything about whether it's a Safe Harbor or regular match or profit sharing. It's odd that the various record keeping systems have yet to add a suspense (unallocated) account along with a forfeiture account.

The 3(16) duties should be detailed in the service agreement and/or the plan document. I have seen documents define the PA as the employer and a designated 3(16) administrator with duties outlined in a separate service agreement. If the signing of 5500 is not expressly mentioned in either document, then the 3(16) should NOT sign.

Wait. You said the person has a social security ID and "previous ID" Did he just chuck the previous ID?

I didn't see anything in there about furnishing SPDs or SARs

If the test is passing at just gateway, lowering comp will lower allocation. 5% of $25,000 is less than 5% of $50k. [Thanks, Captain Obvious!]

Which would spin-off require: no way to make a distribution, or allowing them?

Two employers in a "closed MEP" calendar year 401(k) plan (they have a business relationship that is neither a CG nor ASG.) Call them Company L and Company M. Company L sponsors the plan, and M signs a joinder agreement. Late in 2015, as of 11/1, Company M leaves the MEP and starts its own plan. The doc was written with a short plan year 11/1 to 12/31. Is this a spin-off? From my very quick search of the topic, a spin-off retains the plan year of the original. But if this is considered a new plan, it can have any plan year it wants. Again? Is this a spin-off? Company M was/is its own employer, so that is not changing. Participants were not given an option to cash out or do direct rollovers.

I'm with MoJo on this, and not just from the record keeper angle. Having the participant send the checks to the employer first, and having the employer send it over via "payroll," allows the plan sponsor and trustee better audit the plan. This leads me to a question: If the participant is sending checks (either directly or via the employer) can there be a failure to remit timely if the person is late in sending his/her checks?

I would just take it out.

Who files paper returns any more (other than EZs)?

Wait. Did the person work 1000 hours from 1/1 to 5/2?

From the EOB: See the bolded. I know it's not black letter law, but I would consider the loan obligation occurring at the time all the signatures (or computer authorizations) are finalized.

So say I have $10,000 in my account on Tuesday. I apply for a $5,000 loan, and everything is signed and sent back that day. Due tot he 3-day processing window at the carrier, my loan isn't processed until Friday morning where the balance has dropped to $9,500. How could you process a loan for $4750? All my paperwork and schedule say $5,000.

Here is the same release from SunGard's Press Room https://www.sungard.com/company/newsroom/press-releases/2015/corporate113015

Looks it the deal was completed Nov. 30. http://www.investor.fisglobal.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=180304&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2118700

I don't.