BG5150

404(c) is investment related. I don't see where vesting comes into play. And, I don't think daily valuation is a requirement either, just that the participant must have control over the investments. Nothing in there says that an investment be immediately under the control of the participant. The plan can impose restrictions on the frequency of changes. I believe the participants must be able to give instructions at least once every quarter. I think is was the "final" 401(k) regs that added the vesting requirements to the statements? Or, at least, something after EGTRRA. Here's the 404(c) reg: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/2550.404c-1

For some reason, payroll company stopped the matching contribution for everyone mid-2019. We only do the PS and just enter the match for (a)4 testing. Owner HCE was maxed out to $62,000. They are going to make up the match for everyone else. Should they bother with the owner? Otherwise, he will have a 415 excess and get some of his deferrals refunded. (He's the only one with a 415 issue in either 2019 or '20)

Then he should have plenty of time to help us out here!

I have someone who terminated in 2020 and took a distribution. I need to add her distribution amount back to the plan balance for Top Heavy. Do I have to also add back any of her in-service withdraws the previous 4 years?

Hypothetical situation: 2019 plan fails the ADP test, and they correct it with refunds August 2020. The 5330 tax is $1,050 and was paid. Then this January, they realize that some HCE comp was lower than in reality. With the new numbers, the plan passes. What happens to that $1,050 excise tax? The plan didn't really need to be corrected, so it couldn'tve been late. Can you ask for a refund of your tax?

Sorry, the question was meant for Becky...

Catty, is the plan set up as everyone in their own group or design based safe harbor via pro rata allocation?

Anyone try to file a 5500-SF with 2 participants? Mine keeps getting rejected. I get a warning in Relius saying that if I qualify to use the EZ I now have to use that form. But this is plan is not a 'one participant plan.' It's an owner and an employee. Relius says it's probably a DOL problem, but they didn't seem to know anything about it. A co-worker saw a posting on Datair's forums about a similar issue.

But shouldn't the trust accounts be set up under the Plan's EIN and not the sponsor's?

We have some plans done by a former administrator that have individual brokerage type accounts. I believe these accounts were set up using the ER's EIN instead of a Trust EIN. What are the ramifications of this, if any? I always get a separate TIN when the accounts are either in a pooled account or individual brokerage accounts. The former admin ceased doing that because he got tired of the pushback when the TIN was retired due to inactivity. I was setting up a new plan, and was told it was OK to just have the sponsor's EIN as the Trust EIN in the doc.

I used to have a chart that listed a bunch or retirement plans and which could be had in the same year and which couldn't Anyone have anything like that? I've been looking through everything I have and cannot seen to locate it.

And remember, the expenses have to be reasonable. Not gonna pay someone $5,000 to put together census data for a 50 person plan. (and if they really want to pay that much, send them my contact info. I'm free on weekends to help out.)

Do not adjust the W2.

It's on the IRS website. All three, I think... I'll even help https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/plan-participant-employee/retirement-topics-required-minimum-distributions-rmds

Attribution doesn't count in those cases. But in the case of husband and wife, it says that the owner/partners AND their spouses, so, in your case, the wife is automatically included--it doesn't matter how much she directly owns, if anything.

And, for 2016, you'd use the 2016 ADP (or one of the alternatives CB suggested) and multiply by the comp thru 2/15/16. If THAT'S no known, you could probably use 2016 comp times 87.5% (or 10.5/12 months).

Basically, it's saying if you have to make a corrective contribution and it's $300, and there's a loss of $20, you can either deposit $300 or $280. However, if there is a corrective distribution of $300 with a $20 loss, you distribute $280. Just my take.

That describes a 415 excess.

And what is the fix under EPCRS? The only section I see that addresses it is in Appendix B in .07 about correction by amendment. The ER does not want to correct it by amendment. I don't see anything about not including this person and removing their money.. (I searched EPCRS for 'inclusion'. This was the only section other than instances of things "included" in VCP filings. Do we look to Section 6 on Excess allocations? What 1099-R code do you use? Can't use 1--if the person is under 59.5 otherwise that would trigger a penalty tax, I think.

I should know better than to argue w/ attorneys (and/or former attorneys), but: 415(c)(3): (I left out disability and two more items as they aren't relevant to my thinking ro the discussion) I don't believe this person is a participant, therefore they cannot have "participant's compensation." Is there a different definition of "participant" that I'm missing? Is a participant anyone who, rightly or not, has an account under the plan?

Getting into semantics, but 415 excess are EPCRS issues nowadays...

No she wasn't. Just b/c someone puts funds into a plan doesn't "technically" make you a participant.

Old Actuarial Outpost forums can be found here. Currently up and running. You have to put in the url directly: http://204.232.242.165/actuarial_discussion_forum/index.php

I'd say 415 excess. Zero plan compensation from which to defer.

Generally, I take what the accountant calculates on the K-1 as net Self Employment Earnings and start there. As mentioned above, I believe some guaranteed payments are included in that figure, some are not.