chc93

Cetainly a possibility. But wouldn't you want to cover what happens if there are no cracks? Yes... I agree with you. I think the 2015 Form 5500-SUP will have to be / should be filed if we don't use the 2015 Form 5500-SF... unless the IRS specifically says otherwise. Thanks...

I understand the compliance questions that would be added to the 2015 Form 5500's. But the 2014 Form 5500-SF instructions clearly allow use of the 2014 form for a short 2015 plan year if the form is not available by the filing... so unless they change the 2014 form instructions, it's possible that they let this "short period" fall through the cracks for the compliance questions? Or make you file the 5500-SUP at a later date... just another humbug...

No such message appears on the 2014 Form. So if we carry the dates to the 2014 Form... the message would say "if e-filing a short 2015 plan year, you will need to e-file on the 2015 forms starting 1/2/2016". Then... I can use the 2014 Form for the short 2015 plan year if I do it before Jan 2016. I hope this ends up being the case.

I've switched from the 5500-SF "regular" to checking the one-participant box in a later year (only employee terminated). No problems yet...

I will have the same situation. The 2014 Form 5500-SF instructions has the following.... ************************** Notes. (1) If the filing due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the return/report may be filed on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday. (2) If the 2015 Form 5500 is not available before the plan or DFE filing, use the 2014 Form 5500 and enter the 2015 fiscal year beginning and ending dates on the line provided at the top of the form. ************************** So I think the 2015 Form 5500-SF final filing can use the 2014 Form 5500-SF... unless they change the instructions for the 2014 Form 5500-SF. However, the 2015 Form 5500-SUP says that if the deadline for filing the 5500-SUP is after Dec, 31, 2015, the 5500-SUP must be filed. So, would it be OK then to file the 2015 Form 5500-SF using the 2014 Form 5500-SF, and later filing the 2015 Form 5500-SUP on paper. edit: I didn't find instructions for the 2015 Form 5500-SF...

Like Tom says... what about looking at it this way. HCE gets x%. NHCE-A gets 31%. NHCE-B gets 3% top heavy only. Coverage ratio is 100% (all NHCE's benefit). But then this is not a uniform allocation, so have to cross-test. Then NHCE-B gets additional 2% for gateway. If cross-test passes... all is good. You still have 1 NHCE "group"... NHCE-A only. NHCE-B doesn't get anything other that statutory minimums, and so I don't think this would be another NHCE "group".

#1. So if no ownership at Jan 1 and until after Dec 31, then no owners during the plan year... not sure this is correct. I think ownership from 2014 continues until the next determination, so same ownership through 2015. #2. I think it is clear that for RMD, 5% ownership is determined only in the calendar year in which age 70-1/2 is attained. #3. I've seen plan documents that say once RMD starts for 5% owner, it must continue even if less than 5% owner in future years. Also seen plan documents that don't address this. There was an IRS webcast (can't find it anymore) that said the RMD can stop in future years when ownership drops below 5%. #4. I've always counted receivable contributions as part of the account balance on the last day of the prior year. My two cents...

I've always wondered about this. Plan audit supposed to review plan assets? So if only 40 participants have plan assets, why is an audit needed if participants eligible to defer but decide not to and therefore don't have any plan assets required to be in the "participant count" for a plan audit?

What calendar year did the partner attain age 70-1/2?

When I spoke with the IRS when I first started using the FIRE system for the 8955-SSA (in 2011?), they told me that the "date transmitted" is used for the "filing date". It takes a day or two for the system to verify the data (format only, I think) and then the status goes to "Good, Not Released". They do not send the information to the SSA every day, but periodically. They initially told me they do it once a month, but it seems like it occurs much sooner (like weeks). When they actually send it to the SSA, the status will be changed to "Good, Released". All through this process, the "date transmitted" doesn't change, and represents the "filing date".

Also try Millenium Trust...

What about this... Business closes at 5:00:00 PM each day. Work to 5:00:00 PM on Dec 31. Then "retirement" starts at 5:00:01 PM on Dec 31. But since business is already closed, next business day is the "first retirement date"... or Jan 1 (assuming business is open, otherwise first day business is open after 5:00:01 PM Dec 31). In this case, think I would say that I worked on Dec 31, and retired on Jan 1 (or first business day following), not retired on Dec 31 since I worked to the end of Dec 31.

Reg 1.401(k)-1(d)3(iii)(B)(4) Payments necessary to prevent the eviction of the employee from the employee's principal residence or foreclosure on the mortgage on that residence. First part implies rental payments... no ownership. Second part implies ownership with mortgage. If so, no legal ownership of "principal residence" required.

He decided to pay off some debt. To be clear, this is a friend, not a participant of a plan I administer. He said he asked payroll what he should do and they let him decide, which I thought was really strange. If he paid off "some" debt, he should have a substantial amount left from the loan. What if he takes the remaining amount of the loan after paying "some" debt, pay down the loan by that amount, and reamortize the remaining balance for 5 years (or less). Then he is actually financing his "some" debt.

Most plan documents have a section on rehired employees / participants. Try that?

Can the match contribution sufficient to cover the refund for failed ACP test be paid now (before Mar 15) and the rest later...

Also, you should be able to upload the Excel file into one of the approved vendors software.

Yes... and from numerous ASPPA conferences (of course, verbal), no compensation means not in any coverage or discrimination tests... so it's as if the participant is "terminated", or at least "not employed".

The regs allow for the plan to have RMD's for everyone at age 70-1/2 regardless of ownership. If the plan is silent, I would guess that a consistent interpretation of the plan document and regs is OK.

Would the "service condition" be defined in the plan document for "year of service". Then if it is elapsed time, that's your benchmark...

We put the state code in Box 13. Boxes 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 are all left blank. If I recall correctly, FTWilliam flags Box 12 as an error if a state code is not entered.

Tom... thank you very much for the clarification.

Sorry guys... yes, I meant a 2% TH "benefit accrual" in the CB, not a 2% pay credit. Which is why I too simply said that the 2% in the CB which satisfies the CB TH requirement. My bad for not being clear.

But then, if each plan (CB, DC) satisfies their own TH requirement, and the plan documents allow for each plan to satisfy their own TH requirement, shouldn't that be OK? Said another way, your 2% in the CB and 3% in the DC satisfies TH in each plan, even if they don't equal 5%.

You say "began matching again". Is there past practice for calculating the match?