stephen

I agree with Bird. Currently "it does not matter" but who's to say it may not matter in the future. If you don't maintain the separate tracking it will be extremely difficult to separate the money types later.

At least Pax can't shoo us all away by being off track from the original post in the Miscellany Message Board...

I am not certain of the form but there is an exception for a 100% S-Corp owned by an ESOP to maintain a fiscal year. I had many clients affected by the recent change where S-corps that were under 100% had to switch to calendar year while the 100% clients were able to maintain their fiscal year- Pehaps Becky Miller, RLL or Kirk will provide more information.

An S-Corporation 100% owned by an ESOP can maintain a fiscal year plan year without penalty.

Tom, Hopefully, you'll make it through Ivan unscathed as well. On the Yankees, perhaps they will be asked to forfeit the next game at Yankee Stadium that gets rained out as they could put a roof over the stadium and then would not have any rain outs... Stephen

For the last several years ASPA has been offering classes covering C-1 through C-4 exams. In each of these there are many sample exam questions. If you know anyone who has attened the conference they will be able to access the slides/handouts from the sessions on the CD-ROM. There are also sample exams in the study guide (or on the ASPA website).

RLL or Kirk are you out there...

R. Butler- two comments: 1) Kentucky vs. Louisville (Reminder this is not BASKETBALL SEASON!) 2) Are you sure the store is still standing on Sannibel Island (after Charley)? By the way GO WOLFPACK!

Unless of course you are anxious to see Florida State vs. Miami on Monday night as the hurricane has postponed that game ... to next Friday.

Pax, Rev Ruling 2003-44 does not seem to be included in this listing. The list jumps from 2003-43 to 2003-46.

As usual, I agree with Blinky...

Interesting concept to encourage a solo-DB sponsor to use a cliff (five year) vesting schedule to delay MRDs. It would allow them to accumulate five years of contributions before required MRDs would begin.

From the IRS Website: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=128465,00.html IRS Grants Tax Relief for Tropical Storms’ Victims IR-2004-108, Aug. 16, 2004 (Updated 8/24/04 to add Flagler County) (Updated 8/31/04 to add incident ending date) WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service today announced special tax relief for taxpayers in the Presidential Disaster Area that was struck by Tropical Storm Bonnie and Hurricane Charley during the period Aug. 11-30, 2004. Taxpayers in 26 Florida counties generally will have until Oct. 15 to file tax returns and submit tax payments. The IRS will abate interest and any late filing or late payment penalties that would apply. “Storm victims shouldn’t be worrying about taxes at a time like this,” said IRS Commissioner Mark W. Everson. “The special tax relief announced today will give people more time to file and pay their taxes.” The IRS announcement coincides with Aug. 16, which is the national deadline for almost 8.5 million taxpayers who received an automatic extension to file tax returns originally due on April 15. The disaster area consists of 26 Florida counties: Brevard, Charlotte, Collier, DeSoto, Dixie, Duval, Flagler, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Highlands, Indian River, Lake, Lee, Levy, Manatee, Monroe, Okeechobee, Orange, Osceola, Pasco, Polk, St. Johns, Sarasota, Seminole and Volusia. Among the tax relief details: The Federal Tax Deposit (FTD) Penalty Waiver Period for employment and excise tax deposits is Aug. 11-23, 2004. The Extension Period for returns and other tax payments is Aug. 11 – Oct. 15, 2004. The Disaster Designation for this area is “Bonnie/Charley” — taxpayers mark certain relief-related forms with this designation. Relief Provisions

Three doctors were each Sole Proprietors until 06/01/03, at that time they formed a partnership. (Without consulting with us in advance...) All of the doctors had calendar year safe harbor 401(k)s. One of the plans was amended to the new plan name on behalf of the partnership. The other two doctors adopted this amended plan. None of the plan provisions were changed. Should I combine each doctor's Schedule C (1/1/03 through 5/31/03) and K1 income as calculated (6/1/03 - 12/31/03) and limit each of them to the $200,000 compensation limit?

I have seen this type of scenario argued both ways- The two employees terminated in August could become 100% vested or could be excluded from the 100% vesting depending on the attorney for the plan. Thus, my suggestion would be to refer the quesiton to the ERISA counsel for the plan.

Merlin, If you are still looking for another opinion you may want to post your original on the Q&A column by Derrin Watson.

Would it work to let the current plan continue through 12/31 and start the new plan 1/1?

I thought that may be the case- I am a new user of Pension Online and the cross tested allocation with 3% safe harbor nonelective contribution seemed to be allocated as I explained. Any ideas?

Perhaps Dave Baker could answer that one... Is FYI411 an active sponsor of this valuable service or is she simply soliciting business? ( Including one solicitation on a post that is more than 5 years old... )

1) For example, if HCE wants 15% total contribution. You may reduce 15% by 3% safe harbor which leaves 12% profit sharing. Thus, the staff would need to receive 1/3 of 12 = 4% profit sharing contribution to meet the gateway. 2) Immediate 100% vesting only applies to the 3% nonelective for the safe harbor. 3) The net contribution for the staff comes in two pieces totaling 7%. 3% is safe harbor nonelective contribution and is 100% vested and 4% profit sharing contribution allowed to follow a vesting schedule.

Tom, With the time remaining at the end of your 75 minutes perhaps you can also discuss ESOPs as there probably won't be any ESOP sessions this year.

I agree with Blinky...

The windows version was supposed to have been released a number of years ago. I hope it gets through this time. My experience on Datair was good.

Thank You Katherine for the definitive answer (and the great link)!

While it is nice the employer wants to offer incentives outside of the plan to encourage participants to defer it is not deductible within the plan. I agree with your suggestion to increase the matching benefit as encouragement to improve participation. Perhaps the participation would increase with a better communication program showing the participants the power of the increased matching contribution along with compound interest.