PensionPro
Senior Contributor-
Posts
823 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Everything posted by PensionPro
-
Maybe this will help? http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?/topic/55447-student-employees/
-
where fees or charges to the plan are determined on the basis of account balances a per capita method of allocating such expenses among all participants would appear arbitrary. - from the fab cited in post # 2
-
Do the plans pass 410(b) if aggregated?
-
take time to complete this worksheet is my suggestion ira_deduction_worksheet_1040i.pdf
-
I used the yearbook once in a while and will miss it. ASPPA reminds me of the airlines that frequently cut services, increase fees, and call it enhancements! But that's just me.
-
extending tax return after already filing
PensionPro replied to Bri's topic in Retirement Plans in General
Is there a cite for this? Also why can the CPA not file the tax return and extension on the same day? -
Universal Availability
PensionPro replied to austin3515's topic in 403(b) Plans, Accounts or Annuities
Assuming you are only talking about employee elective deferrals? -
Universal Availability
PensionPro replied to austin3515's topic in 403(b) Plans, Accounts or Annuities
The IRS has clarified that UA applies to each common law entity separately rather than grouping controlled groups together. However you do consider controlled groups for other purposes such as 415(c ), 401(a)(9), HCE determination, 15-year catch-up. -
yes and no in that order
-
$5,500 is the limit per individual not per IRA
-
he can receive zero ps
-
Are SEP Contributions included in ABT
PensionPro replied to Lori Foresz's topic in Cross-Tested Plans
no -
410(b)-6(C) transition period - does it apply?
PensionPro replied to Belgarath's topic in Retirement Plans in General
eob agrees ... The transition relief granted by IRC 410(b)(6)(C ) appears to contemplate some form of acquisition from an unrelated entity. The formation of a new subsidiary by a company, as part of a business restructuring, or acquisition involving entities that are already part of a related group, are probably not covered by the transition rule. -
179 exps are deducted before deduction of the employee cost and therefore before se tax calc. see instructions to box 14 of k-1.
-
I believe # 2 creates a controlled group so you would end up with a single employer plan.
-
before concluding they are not a controlled group couple of questions to consider 1. are they In a community property state? 2. do they have a minor child under the age of 21?
-
There is a school of thought that believes that for the th minimum contribution key/non-key employees are determined as of the last day of the prior plan year. Therefore current comp should make no difference.
-
not finding it in black & white: S-Corp K-1 isn't comp
PensionPro replied to AlbanyConsultant's topic in 401(k) Plans
I’m a shareholder and an employee of an S corporation. Can I contribute to the company’s 401(k) plan or establish a self-employed retirement plan based on my S corporation distributions? No. Contributions to a retirement plan can only be made from compensation, which, in the case of a self-employed individual, is earned income. Distributions you receive as a shareholder of an S corporation do not constitute earned income for retirement plan purposes (see IRC sections 401(c )(1) and 1402(a)(2)). http://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Retirement-Plan-FAQs-Regarding-Contributions---S-Corporation -
Speaking of real life would your answer change if the employee terminated in the meantime say in 2012?
-
QDRO: Accept Or Not
PensionPro replied to PensionPro's topic in Qualified Domestic Relations Orders (QDROs)
Thanks for the responses. As much as the PA would like to accept the QDRO to avoid additional legal fees and rigmarole the issue for the PA from the compliance standpoint is the risk of not following the letter of the court-approved QDRO. The QDRO is clearly flawed in that it is asking the PA to do something that the PA can not. We are in consultation with the parties involved to determine if they can propose a legal solution that would alleviate the risk for the PA. After all the sticking point only relates to earnings for less than a year in a DC plan. The issue would have been avoided if the attorneys for the participant and AP had consulted the PA prior to finalizing the order, which I thought was customary. Incidentally, the QDRO could have been more meticulously drafted. It lists the custodian of plan assets as the PA but the PA is willing to overlook these details of lesser importance. Edited to Add: Part of the discussion involves requesting PA of prior plan A to provide earnings calculation for 2011 as a professional courtesy. Thanks QDROphile for that recommendation! -
MEP A spun off single employer plan B eff 1/1/12. PA of Plan B receives QDRO with a date in 2011 as the date of property settlement and stating that earnings will calculated as of a date in 2011. PA of Plan B has no authority or resources to calculate earnings prior to the plan effective date in 2012. Can Plan B resolve this issue through negotiation with legal counsel for participant and AP or is it a more prudent course of action to reject the QDRO and request a modified order? We are the TPA advising the PA on the acceptability of the QDRO. Thanks for your comments and perspectives.
-
Gov Plan Determination Letter Required?
PensionPro replied to dmwe's topic in 403(b) Plans, Accounts or Annuities
Filing for DL is not REQUIRED. Is the lawyer providing a cite from RP 2007-44? -
yes he is entitled to the th minimum.
-
You can have less restrictive eligibility requirements than the 3-of-5 so you should be fine. But you can not exclude employees who have worked 3-of-5.
