K2retire

I believe under the circumstances that you describe that the child MUST be allowed to participate in the plan.

Or make the new plan a 7/31 plan year end.

Perhaps altering the contract to provide that those contributions be made to a non-qualified plan, rather than the 401(k), would help.

I have always wondered if that wasn't part of the problem!

Thanks Peter -- that's exactly what I needed.

Mine does as well. I just wasn't sure what the definition was regarding excluding them for testing purposes.

Perhaps it's too much eggnog, but I can't seem to wrap my mind around this issue. We have a client with 2 plans. One plan excludes union employees. The other covers only union employees. They are in a right to work state and have many employees who have chosen not to join the union. I believe the employees covered by the collective bargaining agreement, whether or not they choose to join the union, belong in the union plan. Is that sufficient to make them excludable in the non-union plan testing? Or must they actually be union members to be excludable?

I've had that happen also!

She has 5500s for both plans, including one from the MPP from 3 or 4 years after it was supposedly terminated. Curiously, that one shows the exact same balances, income, expenses, etc. as the one for the PSP for the same year. They each show 9 participants and a plan value of slightly more than $3 million. Both she and I suspect that someone used the wrong plan information, figured it out and refiled using the right information. Someone that she spoke to suggested making the ex prove what happened with that. She suspects fraud. (She also said she never signed an income tax return in 20+ years of marriage.) And she's a very talkative person who could very well be getting on the divorce lawyer's last nerve.

Don't forget that the first distribution each year must satisfy the RMD and cannot be rolled over.

Her divorce attorney is telling her she needs someone with ERISA knowledge to persuade the judge to reopen the property settlement. It doesn't make sense to me.

I've been talking to a woman whose ex-husband "forgot" to mention one or more retirement plans as assets in a divorce settlement. The ex is a physician who is the plan sponsor. She has been researching the plans and talking to ERISA attorneys and other who are knowledgeable about plans. Apparently there was a money purchase plan that terminated in 2010 and the assets merged into a profit sharing plan. So far as we can tell, the profit sharing plan was still in existence at the time of the divorce. Two ERISA attorneys have suggested that she involve the IRS or DOL. I am aware of EBSA's call centers that assist plan participants. I don't know of anything similar on the IRS side. Regardless, I'm at a loss to understand what either agency can do about the fact that the assets of the plan were not disclosed in a divorce settlement. What am I missing?

And if they run true to form, the contents won't be disclosed until the day of the vote.

Because a copy of deferral elections is one of the first things requested in an audit, he should complete the same deferral election form or online election as any other employees. That will keep auditors happy.

Withholding is not possible on in-plan conversions. As for your question about whether it can be done, the document should have that answer.

Yes, catch up could be used.

The usual problem with a forced rollover of a balance below $1,000 is that very few IRA providers are willing to accept such a small balance. If you've found one that will take a small amount, consider it a bonus: you have more options!

What is an under saver sweep?

If the NHCE ADP is 0% the HCE is limited to 0%, not 2%.

I've used it many times. The tricky thing is to remember what was used for 9/30/17 when it's time to look at 9/30/18 and also calendar year 2017 (for the participant).

To the government, no. To most of us, yes!

It is likely a recordkeeper issue.

It's been a few years since I looked at those rules. They could have changed.

The Federal government retirement plans (Do you know if this is FERS or CSRS?) do not follow the same rules as private plan QDROs. You need to talk to someone who his familiar with those specific rules.

Why does the employer want to avoid providing it?