stephen

Andy, IMHO, I do not think it is absurd that ASPPA is trying to help educate financial advisors to help financial advisors learn more about how plans should be operated in accordance with the law instead of as the way they think it should work.

Could the company declare a dividend that could be used to pay on the note? I am not sure if money in the plan can be used to make loan repayments as I have not seen this done in practice. I think if it were done the money used from participant accounts would be used prorata to pay on the note and would thus receive a prorata portion of the share release.

Or you could invest time and effort into learning all you can about ESOPs and build up that part of your practice. Thus, making your investment worthwhile.

For informaiton on Put Options you may want to check: The ESOP Association or NCEO website's or perhaps check with an ERISA Attorney in your area.

yes

This should be addressed in the plan document. Generally these earnings are based on one of the methods you suggest.

Vebaguru, I did not realize you were an actuary as only an actuary could come up with a way to say we are at all 50 reasons with but so few reasons actually listed.

No the plan cannot currently carryforward unused contributions amounts. Many years ago this was an option and I suppose if the plan still has carryforard available they may be able to use it now.

Belgarath, perhaps the case is: Edes v. Verizon Communications (1st Cir 08/02/05) (as stated in Moe's title).

Hmmm, I was unaware that this was a contest...

With my prior firm I logged onto Relius Documents remotely and was extremely disppointed at how long it took to process anything in the program. The firm was supposed to switch to Relius' Documents online version which would solve the issues. I no longer work for that firm and am unsure if the switch occurred or helped. Have you contacted Relius regradibng these issues?

I do not think many / if any TPAs would pay to have electronic statements sent to them. I do think the brokerage company could save a substantial amount of money in printing and mailing of statements by sending them electronically and the TPA could print only the statements they needed. I think if these savings were passed onto the plan it would give that firm an advantage over others. I also think it could give a broker an advantage over another especially for a firm moving towards or already in a "paperless" enviornment.

For 2005 plan years it seems this is changing. See the link below. 2005 5500 Schedule T Changes

Moe, you seem to want to tell the client their verbal notice was ok and they are free and clear and to me it seems you are grasping for straws to support this argument. To me it seems worthwhile to see if the service will let you put in the 3% for the staff for the affected years and continue the plan or terminate the plan (and probably at a minimum require the client to pay taxes and any applicable penalties on their contributions) as I would not advise a client to do anything that would not follow the law. Another option may be to let the client know that if caught on audit the penalties are as follws: and let them chose. You are free to advise your client as you choose. The other members of this board are giving you their take on the situation. Good Luck.

I think the employer would have a very difficult time proving he notified all of the employees about the plan and that he had elected the 3% matching option and that all of the participants declined to particpate since he has nothing in writing.

Moe, I do not think "For 2004 your employer elects to contribute to your Simple-IRA a matching contribution equal to your deferral up to 3% of your compensation" is really all that complex. NOR do I think the employer in this case followed the rules as set forth by the IRS for SIMPLE IRAs. I do find it interesting that NONE of the employees elected to defer anything since they were eligible to receive a 3% matching contribution by deferring 3% of compensation. Perhaps the verbal commication was not clear enough. I also think the employer would have a hard time in court arguing that none of the employees took him up on his offer to provide the 3% matching contribution. Is is it worth all of this over $12,000 in contributions? Parhaps he could deposit 3% for 2004 and 2005 for the staff and be done with it. This may be cheaper than the penalties that could be incurred.

The timing of the death could impact this scenario. For example, if it is a calendar year plan and the husband died in 2004 the daughter would still be a 5% owner in 2005.

Loan repayments must be made at least quarterly. Thus, weekly, every other weekn twice a month, monthly, and quarterly repayments are all ok.

I would think it is subject to the excise tax annually. Also, you may have a plan disqualificaiton issue since you are not following the terms of your plan document by allocating monies that have been contributed to the plan as stated in the document. Under what premise do you think the employer can remove the money? I do not think they can as it is an unallocated contribution and should have been allocated according to the plan document.

Can't help with the tickets, but did want the Red Sox fans to take solice in the fact that if the Yankees loose one more game this month they will have their first loosing record in the month of April in at least 12 years.

There is not a requirement to deposit by 3/15.

To take this one step further what if the company wants to have ALL of the company stock in the plan as a match or investment and switch to a c-corp without converting to an ESOP?

I believe this book will be available as an online product this year. It is usually available around April 1.

If you are only going to order one reference I would suggest Sal's Book. It covers way more than the Pension Answer Book and in much more depth.

Not that I can think of for a psp. If they had an ESOP there are significant differences...