K2retire

Why would you wan to do that since the funds will escheat to the state after a period of 3-5 years or less if not claimed which is the usual case since most missing participants never return to collect their funds. Why not just forfeit the benefits under IRS reg. 1.411(a)-4(a)(6) and use them to pay for plan admin cost or to distribute among the remaining participants? There's that pesky rule about following the terms of the document. If the document says it goes to a default IRA rollover what choice do you have?

Even within the same geographic area, the pay can vary dramatically. Part of it will be your qualifications and experience, and part of it will relate to working expectations. I left a job that required working 6 days a week for 8-9 months of the year in favor of one that promised a 40 hour work week most of the year. That cost me about $18,000 a year in salary. Most days I think it was well worth it.

A reference some of these young whippersnappers may not get. I was a young whippersnapper when I first saw the movie. Does that count?

Are all the other participants being offered the opportunity to transfer to Merrill Lynch?

It's been several years since I've researched this, but my recollection is that third party insurance payments should not appear on the employer's W-2 because they did not pay it. They should appear on a form issued by the insurance company. And, of course, it they appear on a document from a different payer, they are not plan compensation.

I don't think you will find anything. If it is considered a "Mistake in Fact" it can come out of the plan. Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be a good comprehensive definition of what constitutes a Mistake in Fact. Genearlly typographical errors or duplicate deposits are pretty safe bets, beyond that, it's not so clear.

I haven't looked a the2009 Schedule K-1, but in past years the net earning income amount did not appear on the form. It used to be that the amount before the required adjustments for SE taxes and employer contributions was all that appeared. Has that changed his year?

As the child of a clinical psychologist, I have it on good authority that attempting to make sense of IRS regulations will make you certifiably crazy!

Depends on the type of plan. In a profit sharing or 401(k) plan there must be substantial and ongoing contributions for the plan to avoid being deemed terminated. For a money purchase or DB plan there are various notice requirements and accrual conditions to consider.

We're very much an assembly line shop -- the clients were not offered any options. No staff was added. Our 23 people handled this in addition to our usual work load. (The number of plans terminating due to the recession helped with that.)

A limited partnership interest is supposed to be valued periodically. Unless it is publicly traded, it is unlikely that ths value can be determined without hiring an outside appraiser. The last time I had to do one of those (in the early 1990s) it cost over $10,000. You have to have a REALLY good return on investment to offset that kind of expense.

Out of about 8000, we've got about 80% done, 10% written but the client hasn't signed them yet, and another 10% to be written.

Hardships are specifically exempted according to the ERISA Outline Book.

Perhaps because it's late in the day, or I'm having a senior moment, I'm doubting my memory. Plan has allowed in-service distribution of amounts rolled into the plan from other plans. They would now like to amend to remove that provision. Isn't that a protected benefit as to the rollover balances in the plan prior to the date of the amendment?

Precisely why we added a sentence to our beneficiary designation forms specifically acknowledging that the form is automatically voided by a marriage after it is executed.

No doubt true -- but impossible to persuade a politician of that fact. Both parties seem to believe they are far more suited to the job than we are.

As I understand it the risk is that the IRS or other creditors would send information to the investment house attaching all assets of a particular EIN. It is then left to the plan's fiduciaries to get the endeavour to get the assets back by explaining that they were really plan assets, not employer assets.

I've also had quite a few.

An interesting view point. I always understood that the only people with authority to sign off on a distribution (whether or not the distribution required discretion) were the plan's fiduciariaries.

In most 401(k) plans participants are not permitted to put money back in once it is withdrawn. That makes the recharacterization you describe a mute point.

So how do they qualify as a plan loan? And if they are not a plan loan, how does the insurance company get around the anti-alienation rules? The plan I'm dealing with is a 401(k) -- not a 403(b).

We also wondered why on earth they would WANT to keep the loans.

The paperwork that they prior provider required to be signed before they would agree to transfer the assets specified that loans were not transferable. Unfortunately, the plan sponsor did not notice that provision before signing it.

We ran into this recently as well. The prior service provider was an insurance company. The loan documents that the clients signed to receive the loan specified that they could not be transferred to another provider. So far, they will not budge on that issue and have retained sufficient other assets to serve as collateral for the outstanding loans. They say they intend to transfer available cash to us on an annual basis. If you find a solution, I'd love to hear about it!

And that is truly the scary part of the situation today!