BG5150

Were there assets?

EPCRS Sec. 6.06 (4) Bolded seems relevant.

Maybe the get together in a couple of weeks will shed some more light. Maybe.

Automatic escalators only apply to those who are auto-enrolled. Once a participant makes an affirmative election on his or her deferral, they are then out of the auto deferral group and should not be automatically increased.

Is changing the loan program an amendment? Or is it more of an administrative procedures thing? I know all participants must get SPDs/SMMs, but who has to get the loan program? Everyone, or just people who ask for it?

Any good write-ups on using rate banding when allocating a profit sharing. I'm kinda hazy on the topic. One of my plans magically passes testing when I check that little box in Relius. Otherwise it fails.

I don't see anything in EPCRS that says "this only applies to non-owners."

Because no one accrues the right to an employer contribution until 12/31 (in this case), you aren't applying it retroactively, but prospectively to the end of the year. Just make sure the plan can be amended in that way. (Can you have such an allocation on a standardized prototype?)

Amend to use grouping method, everyone in own group. Or Owner and everyone else, etc. And just give the owner nothing. Automatically passes testing, as no HCE benefits.

But may instead be filed on an SF with abbreviated reporting requirements.

What are the allocation conditions as it stands now? Is there a last day rule?

Who wrote your document? Ask them.

Though, if the assets are with a big carrier, there usually is a place on the distribution form to elect more withholding, and we generally accept that as a W-4P Equivalent. We also added a similar line to our distribution forms (for participants in pooled accounts). I rarely give out any W-4Ps.

Is the funding structure of the plan really wacky? If not, I'd just assume keep filing SOMETHING, because, like Bird said, someone is gonna get a letter in a year or two asking where the 5500 is. What's it take, maybe 2 minutes to fill in an EZ and 46 cents to mail it?

I've seen 100% withholding at the participant's request.

How does the plan document account for this contribution to the retirement plan?

I'd correct both of them. Remove the excess plus investment experience and put it in the suspense account. Then use it to offset the next matching deposit(s). I would not send it back tot he company as mistake of fact..

if this is a plan with individual accounts with individual investment direction, I don't see how you could make them change.

Dumb question: can it be rolled over to an IRA?

1. You don't have a "catch-up" contribution until someone hits an applicable limit. The limits are: a plan limit (ex. the plan only allows for deferrals up to 15% of compensation), 415 limit, limit due to ADP testing, 402(g) limit. You could run into a situation where someone intends on making the full $17,500 + another $5,500 during the year. So, they decide to do $1,458 "regular" and $458 "catchup" in deferrals every month. However, what if they quit or get fired after, say, April. That would be only $5,832 regular and $1,832 catchup for a total of $7,664. I doubt that would hit any of the applicable limits, so ALL of it is "regular" 401(k). 2. I doubt your document states when you are contributing the match, but rather when and how it's calculated. If you are calculating using a payroll-by-payroll match, then no true-up should be necessary; you are doing 26 (or 24 or 52) discrete calculations that all stand alone. The only time a "true-up" would/should be necessary is if something got missed. So, with a payroll based match, it won't matter how many times you change the match during the year. Each paycheck is independent of the others. 3. Does the document really say you are calculating the nonelective piece every payroll? Are there no allocation conditions?

I'd get a new election.

will 414(s) have been satisfied for all those years?

From FAB 2006-1:

That seems counterproductive on a participant level. Regs say the participant does not have to take counterproductive measures in order to qualify for the hardship. "In order for you to take a hardship distribution of $3,000, you must first pay back the outstanding loan of $5,000." "But, wait, Mr. Administrator. How can I pay the $5,000 back, when I need $3,000?"

Depending on what the TPA was engaged to do, they might not be in a position to make any corrections. It's their duty to inform the company of the issue. As Lou said, the Trustee and Plan Administrator have the responsibility to inform the participant, who in turn has the responsibility to inform his IRA provider. The TPA may or may not be doing the 1099-Rs. As mentioned above, proper 1099's will need to be done from the plan's end. That will either involve the TPA or the asset carrier. A good TPA (like me!) would monitor the situation occasionally, reminding the Administrator and/or Trustee of what needs to be done. Perhaps even help draft the letter to the participant and maybe notify the asset carrier of what happened. But, once the ball is in the Administrator's court, it is up to them to make sure it's done. it seems like the TPA did its job (with the exception of some follow-up) so far. What was the client expecting?