BG5150

I would argue (ii) applies. They were allowed to participate before the applicable plan entry date.

Was this person an HCE at the time?

I think the reason it is a "162" plan is that the premium is given as a "bonus" and bonuses may be deductible under 162 as "reasonable allowance for salaries or other compensation for personal services actually rendered." (162(a)(1))

Do the Trustees believe that once a week trading is prudent for this group of participants? Especially with the amount of platforms that allow for daily transactions. (separate issue than yours, I know, but they may want to look into it.)

I know several people who have truly separate businesses. One guy is a dentist who also has a side business selling refurbished "gently-used" golf balls. Another is a tennis pro who also owns a limosine-for-hire company.

Check the loan policy again. Does it say the loan payments will be ACH'd from the ER's account? I don't think I've seen a loan policy that says how the remittances to the plan will be made. (Though I ahven't made it a point to peruse different loan policies for differences.) They usually state how the participant can/will pay, such as payroll deduction. Check with the R/K. Will THEY be able to do this? Set up individual ACH's for each of these loans?

I disagree, 401king. From EPCRS re: excess allocations: 6.06(2) (emphasis mine)

Never mind. Long weekend.

We have a controlled group of husband and wife with separate business, but with a minor child. Husband has a PS plan. Wife adopts it. His income is $225,000. Her income is $25,000. They file jointly (if that matters) What is the deduction limit? Is it the overall plan limit of $62,500 (225k + 25k / 4)? Or is it limited to each company separately? In other words, can she get a PS contribution of $15,000 and can he get the balance of $47,500? Or does it have to be $55,000 (max 415) for him and $6,250 for her?

Community property state? That wasn't answered. There is no such thing as a "solo 401(k)." That is merely a marketing term. It is simply a regular ol' 401(k) plan that happens to cover only one person. If this guy ever has an employee that qualifies for the plan, then it still is a regular ol' 401(k) plan, but it now covers more than just the owner, and there are additional reporting requirements under ERISA. A question I have, can a MEP file an EZ if the only people are covered are the owners of the respective companies?

Do they have any minor (under 21) children? If so, you have a controlled group. Do they live in a community property state? I think she can be an adopting employer of the plan, and thus, it becomes a multiple employer plan.

I don't work alone. I have all the BenefitsLink-ers doing my job for me!

Use tabs. It's much friendlier and easier to keep track of what's open.

How many hours do they work? You can put in a condition for PS that people must work at least x hours (not more than 1,00) to get the PS. If they work 600 hours, make the cutoff 750. Would they be the only ones affected, though?

I use ctrl-click and it just opens it up in a new tab. Don't have to fuss with a drop-down menu and hit 'open in new window' by mistake. Depending on your settings, it may just open a new tab and keep you where you are, or it may take you to the new tab. I'm using Firefox.

Can't not give them the SH. For the PS, use a new comp formula and just give them nothing. (if you pass testing) Is the plan Top Heavy?

Do you remember where in the EOB? Which topic?

Plan allows for rollovers in for employees expected to become a participant but who haven't met the requirements yet. Are these people "Participants" when it comes to the availability of a Participant loan? Definition of a participant is: To me, neither of this conditions have been met.

But you can't use the ABT if there is fail safe wording, right?

Check again. Does your document have "Fail safe" language? If so, then you must correct according to the steps there. Otherwise, I think you can pick and choose until you pass. Have you tried the Average Benefits Test for coverage? Sometimes that works.

Why would sales want to push this type of product? Unless they expect the plan/participants to purchase the annuities through the company.

If someone is taking a full distribution, I give them the RMD information because that amount is NOT subject to mandatory 20% withholding. We give them the number as ask how much tax they want taken from the RMD (0, 10, 20%) and do the withholding on an aggregate basis (given a pooled account). So, like RBG, the participant gets the RMD number before any 60-day window begins.

Can you force distributions and have the accounts eaten up as processing fees?

I'm a legend in my own mind. Does that count for anything?

Relius does not look at the hours per se. What drives the the YOS criterion for testing is the Years of Service data element. You can have someone credited with 1,000 hours for 5 different plan years, but if the Years of Service on the Service tab is zero, then that person will be (considered) excludable. The flip side is true, too. If a person never had 1,000 hours entered for any plan years, but the Years of Service field is at least 1, then the person will not be considered excludable.