BG5150

Another thought, however. If you originally used disaggregation, you do not have that available to you under the EPCRS correction. You must test the plan as a whole. This will probably further increase your refunds...

What if the distribution is AFTER 4/15? I know the gross is taxed in both years and earnings in the current one. Still no withholding?

Thanks

Not SCP?

If she normally would not get a profit sharing, all she gets is Top Heavy. But, if the plan will be cross-tested, you document probably has her bumped up to the Gateway. That's it. If you need her bumped up to pass testing, you will have to do an 11-g amendment. (Ninja'd by Lou!)

Looking over a Return of Excess form from a large record keeper. In the tax withholding section it says (paraphrasing): if the distribution is on account of 415, ADP or ACP, then 10% withholding will apply unless otherwise indicated below. Then it goes on to say (quoted): Excess deferrals (402(g)) are not subject to withholding. (emphasis mine) Is that right?

Discussion in the office: Key EEs have 75% of plan assets. TH according to account balance test. Plan has 3% SH to all. Plan is deemed NOT to be TH by virtue of the SH rules. What if we excluded all HCE, or only non-owner HCE from the 3% SH. Do we still get the TH "pass" as there may be some HCE who are non-key and would otherwise get the TH contribution had the plan not been SH.

Does the ER trust these people enough that if plan disbursed money to the participants, the participants would pay the company back?

I'm not sure what went on here: Did the company pay for distributions from the plan out of their own pocket first? Like, termination or in-service distributions? Or did the company give the participants their profit sharing contributions right to them instead of putting them into the plan? Some companies call their profit sharing contributions to a plan a profit sharing distribution (because they are distributing company money among the employees/participants).

Your first born or Bird? ;)

With the ease of electronic filing these days, you could amend '16 to have a $2,000 receivable, an 2017 with same rec'able and 2018 with the payout. Maybe do 2018 short plan year and file a second 2017 for with 2018 dates a couple days later. For a total of maybe 15 minutes of work, I don't even think we would charge the client. I would just do the '17 & '18 filings on a one-participant SF just to keep things as consistent as possible.

1) I'm not positive this is for religious reasons. The person has a Middle eastern-sounding name, and I am putting it forth as a possible reason. 2) Just noticed my plan document has a provision that there CANNOT be any irrevocable waivers anymore (though older ones may be enforced).

The default investment will have some sort of earnings akin to interest.

There is a participant in a DC plan who adamantly refuses to have neither an employee nor an employer account. This may have to do with religious reasons against interest bearing accounts. The plan is not top heavy, but it is a 3% SHNEC. He did not sign a waiver prior to becoming eligible in the plan. Has anyone encountered this? How did you resolve it? We were toying with an amendment: All employees hired in November 2015 are ineligible to participate in the plan. He is the only EE hired in that time-frame.

We only take on Safe Harbor business. [Or, at least, that's what I keep telling the owners of our company we should do...]

1000 hours by March 31? She's a workhorse!

Can always file a one-participant SF, too...

Tell the owner he better have all those enrollment forms with 0% deferrals...

To me, the plan is not "obviously" top heavy. The owner and wife would have to have more than 60% of the total plan assets (adjusted by several things). The only way I could see this getting TH is if there were some PS contributions skewed heavily to the owner.

Is the plan Top Heavy? How so? Does the 2% owner (assuming they are indeed a Key EE year after year) have more than 60% of the plan assets? AND, if they did not make a deferral, or receive any PS, then they receive a 0% allocation for the year, and no Top Heavy contribution is necessary.

I'm guessing they could use the 2-yr eligibility with that entry date, tho'

Same rationale for a PS only plan, right...

I don't think so. But your threw me a curveball when you posted Did you mean Safe Harbor (SH) instead of Top Heavy (TH)?

Gap earnings...I know the Final 401(k) took them out, but was it mandatory or voluntary. In other words, could the document still have language saying to calculate it?

Plan has this elgibility: Age 20 1/2 1 YOS (1,000 hrs) Entry date: First day of plan year following. That's it. Ont he surface it seems it violated the 18 months rule, but I am half-remembering (probably incorrectly) that the age 20 1/2 somehow buys me an extra 6 months, but I can figure it out.