imchipbrown

Another thing to consider, if I'm not sticking a foot in my mouth! A match of 4% (or 3% of first 100%, 50% 0f next 2%) is safe harbor and not considered top-heavy. Notice rquirements, vesting considerations, etc. Find 3% across the board easier to think about.

Company has maybe 20 ees, including 3-4 HCEs. Changed from fiscal 4-1 to 3-31 year to short 4-1 to 12-31-05 year. I know I have to pro-rate salary 210*3/4 or $157,500. Integrated, so level is same fraction (3/4). Looking for max contribution. Question is, 415 dollar limit, and what's counted against it. Had a guy defer $14,000 in first three months of '05 that were in the year end 3/31/05 tests. Knock that off the $ limit? Others deferred regularly. I guess the questions are 404© limits (I think 25% pay for short period) and 415© $ limit (when a short year and deferrals in the calendar year). Allocation limits? Any help would be appreciated.

The ballpark became a piece of s*it so many years ago, I can't count. Slapped on a coat of paint for an All-Star Game. Added seats on the Green Monster... travesty. Then in right field. $200 a copy on a bad night. Hey, picnik tables! Went with my Dad last September. Thought the park had been ruined since he first went in 1946. It was probably a dump by then. Never will I turn down a chance to get back into that sty. History trumps. Too old to tear down, I guess.

Client pays out a former participant in 2005 and pays 80% as a lump sum. Doesn't remit the 20% withholding to IRS. To date, no 1099-R or 945 remitted. What to do?

Nice cite, Everett. Option: Take 3 years of $10K (separately (1 at a time) or together), have 100% benefit formula, then lump sum is OK. Option: Remove $10k minimum. Pay lump-sums on accrued benefits. Maybe a reversion! Maybe assets are less than reduced accruals ?

JSB, (My brother's initials) Guy on the porch.. Matt? Guy on the wall..ART? The Dog? Bob Barker? ____________________________________ Guy on the beach? Guy on the mountain? Gal with a frog on her head? Gal surrounded by 18 wheelers? Guy reading Jugs? Guy with Old #9?

Also ran into the fact that the de-minimus benefit "$10K per year" must be paid as an annuity... no lump-sum.

The name of the guy in the bushes? The guy in the hot-tub? The guy in the ditch?

Traveling overseas?

Under sea exploration?

Used Datair for many years; quite happy with them. Lanning is/was an invaluable resource. I've downscaled my practice (why do they call it "practice"?) and find ftwilliam more cost effective. Their software imports your latest filing into your new 5500 (scary), and allows (contrary to Daitair's warnings) to prepare and send a client a .PDF printout for last minute filing.

Are you under audit?

I guess Target Benefit was the most "Comfortable" cross tested plan, audit-wise. Then Age-Weighted PS Plan became superior in some respects. Took several years for IRS auditors in SF area to accept a New-Comp Plan. Problem is, New-Comp is calc-intensive, and no one wants to give you the $ to run the calcs. Just my $5 (look up "Inflation").

You talking about "Flood Control"? Hate that, too.

Divorce, QDRO, re-marry?

Off point but maybe relevant. Say I'm a NHCE with a separate account, deferring (I assume a 401(k) account) $50/check. If I have a seperate account, do I have any real investment options? Most mutual funds want a $1,000 beginning investment. I'd be better off in a pooled account. Of course, facts and circumstances rule the roost.

Correct, unless you amend the adoption agreement. I've seen documents that let the 70+ elect to or not to receive RMDs. I also believe that, as the document is written, this would not be called a REQUIRED minimum distribution.

OOps, that won't work.

I think this might be useful to everyone. Who knows who's lurking? I'm considering registering a new user name and publishing the password so everyone can use it.

Any way to log in anonymously to post a question? "Paranoia runs deep"

Check the Plan and Trust documents. Ours permit these.

I don't think you have a catch-up contribution until you reach a plan-imposed limit (maybe 0% of comp works), the 402(g) limit (not in this case) or the 415 limit (doesn't work here. zero comp, nothing to defer).

Try my website at Pensionalysis. It's not exhastive, but should give you the concept. Click 401(k) plans, then Non-discrimination.

Thanks, Tom Using the same method to fix the ACP test, only HCE1 needs to get a refund. What smells a little funny is that the other 3 HCEs match ($4,500) is 55% of net deferrals. HC1 gets 57.2%. Chip

Am I doing this right? Seems strange. Non Highly Comp'd ADP is 2.96%. Highly Comp'd limited to 4.96%. Four Highly Comp'd. Defer Salary ADRHC1 12000.00 98935.45 12.13%HC2 9000.00 200000.00 4.50%HC3 9000.00 172315.98 5.22%HC$ 9000.00 195827.82 4.60% ADP 6.61% Reduction of $6,520 of HC1 deferral makes his ADR 5.54% and the ADP 4.96%. Take $3,000 off HC1. This makes all HCs deferrals $9,000. Next, take the remaining $3,520 and split it between all HCs ($880). So all HCs are limited to $8,120. HC1 gets distribution of $3,880, all others $880. Employer match goes in with each deferral, 50% of deferral. What do I do about the match? ACP problem is not as bad as the ADP.