BG5150

That made me chuckle...

Susan, don't look at CE as a cost, but rather than an investment in keeping up to date with things. As you know, this industry changes often, and things you were doing 2 years ago might have changed. It's almost a full-time job just trying to keep up. just in thee past year or so we got new, complicated fee disclosure rules, and a new EPCRS. Both very important things to know. Sure, these boards are great resources if you have a specific question, but learning and expanding your knowledge helps create a framework so you can understand the answers given to your questions here. Do you plan on bring in new business? (Well, not you per se, but your company) Being credentialed can be a feather in your cap, especially when many of your competitors will have them, too.

Well, not rolls of bills. But many places have cash accounts that garner no interest or gains or losses (John Hancock comes to mind).

Sometimes. Depends on what's in there. Code D, most of the time. J, nope.

Question is, does the amendment take the plan off prototype or VS? Depending on the wording and content, it might.

Aren't the ER contribs on the W2? Box 12, code W (or DD?).

Right. I corrected my original post.

I thought it was they aren't taking DL requests NOW, unless you are off-language. But that a "regular" restatement window is coming up...

So, if you deem them significant, you have until the end of 2013 to do this. Also, if I read EPCRS correctly, you HAVE to submit the plan for a DL the next go-'round, and explicitly label the amendment an EPCRS correction.

What does your attorney say about it?

How is the match calculated? Payroll or annual? (Not deposited, but what's the basis for the match. The plan doc should have that.)

Why tempt fate? Do the extra 5 minutes of work.

How many of your clients do you think peruse their 5500 before signing it?

Two scenarios: 1) the RMD wasn't enough--do another 2) the RMD was too much--all you have is a small "we didn't withhold enough" problem on the distribution over the RMD

So, someone who was putting money into the plan all along needs the money and is penalized with half the profit sharing, whereas someone who isn't putting anything away at all get the full benefit? Something like that might not discourage hardships, but participation altogether.

Where does it say all the participants own each investment pro-rata? If the trust is all in mutual funds, and my account by coincidence is 1/20th of the total, you wouldn't liquidate 5% of every asset when I cashed out, would you? Why is it any different if a building is part of the mix?

The document can use either compensation. I just worked on a plan that added 401(K) October 1, and we used just 4th quarter comp. for the K and full year comp for the PS.

Our bonus election form says something like: "take x% from my bonuses. This election will stay in place until changed."

And ask the custodians to stop sending you the paper copies. Most will be happy to oblige.

For 2012, the ship has sailed, I think. is it a new comp plan by any chance? However, you might be able to amend the plan in 2013 to do what you want it to do.

Is there really mandatory state withholding?

Did the participant not get a copy of the amortization schedule? Did the participant not get quarterly or annual statements with the loan balance? I would not say the fault lies entirely with the plan sponsor. Who did the year-end reconciling of the plan? TPA? Bundled provider? Someone should have seen this person was really behind at the end of '09. '10 the latest.

EPCRS says no corrective contrib is too small. Distributions, yes, but not contributions. And it looks like the net error is $54, so a $27 QNEC plus earnings and full match on the $54 (not a QMAC) to be made if applicable.

Or you can print them to word and modify them that way.

Have you asked the document provider their take on it?