chc93

KInda late, but... specifically, a 5% owner in the calendar year in which he attains age 70-1/2.

I would think the plan document would tell you if forfeitures can be used for administrative fees.

I looked back at the AckID for the filing I mentioned above. the AckID shows 20141007... Oct 7. The time zone of the filer was Oct 6. Anyway... maybe 11PM local time zone was too close for comfort in this case. (edit) Here's ftwilliam.com email... ****************** From: ftwilliam.com <5500StatusUpdate@ftwilliam.com> To: <me> Sent: Monday, October 6, 2014 10:59 PM Subject: 5500 Status Update Dear <ME>, The status for the 2013 filing for: <Doctor>, M.D., Inc. Profit Sharing Plan (001) has been updated to 'Accepted' with AckID '20141007035935P040012875455001' ****************** Note the date the email from ftwilliam.com was received was Oct 6 local. AckID shows Oct 7.

Supposedly the filing deadline is 12 midnight in the time zone of the plan sponsor. Just for info, I had one plan that was filed on Oct 6 at 11 PM local time in our time zone (got an email confirmation from ftwilliam.com). We are 6 hours behind EST. The DOL/EFAST system recorded the filing as Oct 7. Since then, we made sure that our plans electronically filed by 6 PM our time on Oct 15 (which would be 12 midnight on Oct 15 EST).

I agree with your comment. My understanding is that the EZ can be requested from the IRS. It's just not "posted" online for anyone/everyone to see easily/freely. Although I've not heard of anyone requesting an EZ.

i have had a couple of plans that routinely had this "reconciliation to 5500" section in the audit report. No one blinked an eye. FWIW, many years ago, one issue was the late valuation of company stock whereas the plan valuation used last known value (company instructions to do this, I guess auditors agreed); another issue was the accrual of dividends and interest that was determined by the auditors and not reflected in the trust statements which the plan valuation was based on. I don't have current experience with this issue.

A few years ago, I recall hearing the IRS at conferences say 10%...

This was my recent experience. If the deferral period is more than a few (5-10 years, I forget), the insurance companies wouldn't even give a quote. Quotes provided for only immediate annuities.

Thanks Tom. Is Q-3 still in the temporary reg 1.414(q)-1T ? As far as I can tell, only Q-9 is in the final 1.414(q)-1.

For whatever it's worth, I've always rounded up (I can't recall where I read this). That is, 25 employees is 5 in the top paid group, 26 employees is 6 in the top paid group. So in your case, EE6 would also be in the top paid group, and you would have 7 HCE's.

Something like this happened to us. Turns out the client filed a plan number 002 (using your example) Form 5500-EZ years ago, that he even forgot. Many letters between IRS and plan attorney required to resolve issue.

This is the "issue" for us. Filing the 5330 is not the problem, it's the amount of the excise tax. In the few instances we actually filed a 5330, the excise tax was less than $5.00. In one case, it was $1.38. The client thought we were crazy to have them do this... right or not.

I don't think you can do what you say. Once an employee meets the eligibility requirements and entry date provision, he is eligible to defer... forever while emiployed, no matter how many hours he worked in the year, so has to be in the test. I don't think 1000 hours worked in a plan year is a condition for testing (ADP, ACP, coverage, discrimination), even if you elect to test these participants separately.

We had a DB plan terminated in 2010 and 100% of the excess assets were transferred to their 401k PS plan. The plan termination was audited by the PBGC (more than 500 participants), and the plan was also submitted to the IRS for a DL. The PBGC issued their closing letter and the IRS issued the favorable DL, both without any questions on the 100% excess asset transfer.

Also maybe look at the compensation section. If this "extra" money will be reported on the 2013 W-2, then wouldn't that be "compensation" in 2013 thereby allowing deferrals and requiring safe harbor? The converse is the argument that no compensation means no chance for deferrals so not in ADP test.

What about transferring the benefits to Penchecks, Millennium Trust, or something like that... 4 years seems like a long time.

Another thought, which I think is OK. What about "salaried" and "hourly". Would that fit your criteria? 40 hrs/wk is "salaried", less than that is "hourly".

One possible complexity I see is the group definition of these employees. I'm not sure full-time and part-time would be good for the definition of the groups. I've seen date of hire, years of service, job titles, officers, owners. But if each participant is in his own group, I guess you can do anything... but if not a reasonable classification, probably gotta pass 70% ratio for coverage.

I have seen plan amendments that do not modify the eligibility requirements and entry dates, but instead, in the section for 401k deferrals, have an effective date there. For example, calendar year, Jan 1, July 1 entry dates; The plan amendment that adds the 401k salary deferrals says something like "effective June 1, yyyy, a participant can elect to defer... ", with no change to eligibility or entry dates.

We had this situation a few years ago... but I think our amount involved was more like $1,500, and were litigation settlements. Company in bankruptcy, plan terminated on bankruptcy date and all distributions subsequently completed, no assets in plan, bankruptcy still open, bankruptcy trustee in charge. Based on DOL Field Assistance Bulletin 2006-1, all parties involved agreed to return the funds to the sender, and bankruptcy trustee authorized. (see pages 8-9) fab2006-1.pdf (I hope this attachment works) hope this helps...

EPCRS (RP 2013-12) Section 6.02(5)( c )... ( c ) Recovery of small Overpayments. Generally, if the total amount of an Overpayment to a participant or beneficiary is $100 or less, the Plan Sponsor is not required to seek the return of the Overpayment from the participant or beneficiary. The Plan Sponsor is not required to notify the participant or beneficiary that the Overpayment is not eligible for favorable tax treatment accorded to distributions from the plan (and, specifically, is not eligible for tax-free rollover).

Just a note.... we had a money purchase pension plan where the company had a policy that they will never rehire an employee who terminates for whatever reason. Really made life easier with the plan.

Also... coverage testing for each component plan has to each pass the 70% ratio test, since the way you split the HCE's and NHCE's will most likely not be a reasonable classification so the ABPT for coverage cannot be used.

I thought that regardless of when enrollment and changes are allowed, election to stop deferrals (0%) should be allowed at any time.

In addition, when electronic filing as 1 person SF, the 5500-SF does not show up in the DOL/EFAST search.