GBurns

What happens if the non compete is unenforceable or declared invalid by Court as a violation of law etc ? This should be a very common ocurrence.

A 401(k) has no yield or return it is simply the vehicle through which tax benefits, rules etc are enjoyed or observed. The money in a 401(k) has to be invested. It is that investment vehicle that gives a yield or return not the 401(k). A money market account or fund is just another place to put money. I doubt that anyone would regard it as an investment. It is most similar to a bank savings account. And unless you regard a bank savings account as being a good investment, you should not regard a money market account/fund any differently. Even CDs are usually better for yield. Money Market funds like bank savings accounts have no diversification feature..

As far as I know, once the settlement option is selected and in force the beneficiary (the now ex spouse) is vested. It is now hers. As such it is not part of the divorce settlement unless they put it in for division. If it is not being reassigned as part of the settlement then it stays as it is, namely hers is hers and a QDRO would not serve any purpose. Think of what the QDRO would say or change if 1 had been issued.

But the trick is to choose the method that gives the maximum legal benefit to the owner even if it turns out the employees must be included, and to what extent. As a result Coporate structure etc should be looked at in case a selected method works better under 1 scenario than under another. It most likely will end up as a decision between paying the IRS or sharing with the employees. However how much of either will be conditioned by the method chosen. This is a reason why we use "age weighted" and "cross tested" etc rather standard methods. To understand better joeyd needs to do the research and reading if he wants to "live long and prosper".

You start by doing the suggested reaearch and a little reading. The research will point you to possibilities for which you should get the literature and read. This will give you sufficient knowledge to better understand that which agents will try and sell you. Do not get hung up on any "proprietary" names, that is just window dressing to make a particular plan seem different from others which under the shell are the same thing. quint, See what joeyd says at the start of the 4th paragraph. It wasn't rocket science to have seen this from his 1st post. In fact it is a given. That is what business owners have to do. What is "EOE"?

Yes and no. It is possible to limit the card to the amount contributed and any claims in excess would have to be submitted in the normal fashion and be reimbursed manually. I would expect that to be a nightmare, but that would be the only way to stay compliant that I can think of and still limit the card. If the card is limited and no additional method of reimbursement exists, then the plan would not be in compliance.

Does an S corp allow the same things as a C Corp? Which 1 would serve his future plans better? If he wanted to save out of his W2 earnings he could just go ahead and do so without needing to set up any plan of any sort. He obviously wants to do more than take it out of his own pocket whether it got there by W2 or K1. There are only 2 sources of money available his money and the Corporation's money that has not yet flowed trhough to him. So if he is not using his own W2 money, What then is he doing but looking for a way to transfer the Corporation money outside of a W2 and/or K1 to himself via some vehicle? Pub 560 does not address plan designs so he would not be aware of the terms. Why should he be aware? Based on his facts and circumstance including age, employee's ages etc etc such a plan design might fit his needs or at least be considered. I did not get the point of your questions nor the reference to Mr. Spock. What is the relevance of Mr. Spock and why would/could there be a need for retraction? Retraction of what?

Since you are considering a retirement plan which means that you are considering ways to transfer assets from the Corporation to your personal pocket, it might be a good time to consider whether you should remain an S Corp etc. While you are looking also look at "Age weighted" and "Cross Tested" plans which might not be in Pub 560.

You should also try a Google search.

Who wrote this "prototype sponsor's opinion letter" ?

Donkey Kong You must have a either a lot of free time on your hands, or a special thing for Mike Preston, to have spent the time looking up those particular posts. I wonder why those were selected since in most of them Mike really kept running in circles rather than addressing anyone's points, suggestions or rebuttals (not only mine). I cannot imagine that you spent time and yet selected those to exhibit your point. Did you read the threads or did you just look for the comments? Anyhow, my purpose on this Board is to learn, not to nit pick or to cast apersions at anyone, although comments might get heated during a discussion. But note DURING a discussion meaning 1 in which I am contributing thoughts rather than contributing snide remarks and taking shots at posters.

Nothing was wrong with the shark story itself except that it unnecessarily contained what could be regarded as Personal Private Information or Personally Identifiable Information. Releasing that assumed PPI and PII is what led to the personalized snide and unnecessary remark that followed based of it. There could very well be a Burns Bait & Switch Ins Co (although alluding to such a company was out of context and irrelevant) but adding the Jamaican casts apersions on the character of the many fine and honourable Jamaicans. PII is used quite often just to slander people and was not necessary and possibly not even true since there was no rational basis for that assumption in the first place. If you repost, I guess that I would also repost my rebuttal.

I do not see your issue. The vacation or sick pay was payable before the severance, which is why its there. Just like his final paycheck it is paid after termination. You could not pay severance or a final paycheck until after a termination anyhow, so what's the difference that you see? You pay the severance and back pay etc etc all after termination because they are "payable", which is the same as 'earned" and because that is the only time that it could be paid.

Turn off the "Caps Lock". You are prbably not on the best Forum for this question. What is the issue? Isn't cash out of unused Vacation and Sick Pay on termination a very normal thing especially in the public sector? Where have you heard that it is an issue that might be or needs addressing?

See previous discussion on this same Forum.

Eprail This is what some have done: http://www.benefitnews.com/health/detail.cfm?id=6906 Notice the mention of experimental drugs. Notice also what this author finds as expensive on a per year basis. That is why I questioned that $400,000 was already spent in a few weeks.

I knew what you meant but it was a rare opportunuty to yank your chain.

But how do you return the money?

The VEBA is not a qualified plan, it is the plan that provides the underlying benefits that qualifies as either an "employee welfare benefit plan", a "welfare plan" or a "pension plan" etc. The VEBA ( a Trust) is generally just the medium used to secure the payments and continuity of the underlying benefits.

The H&R Block system asks you for the boxes checked on W2s and 1099s. Either you did not read the instructions on the screen or you need to get the 1099 corrected.

Some people might read that to mean that you are so good that you do not want others to figure out that its not the people there, but it is the software that makes your TPA firm so good. Hmmn? I would not think of that as being good.

Think about it if the payroll is large enough for any payroll to exceed $100,000 in taxes (taking into account employer matching FICA) that employer becomes a next day depositor or a semiweekly depositor. Either way tax deposits are dues within 7 days of many payrolls. On a payroll system 401(k) deductions like FWT and FICA is deducted/reduced from Wages/Salary and held in temporary accounts with names such as FWT Payable, FICA Payable, Health Insurance Payable and 401(k) Payable. Their accuracy is confirmed when the Payroll is balanced before payment of the payroll. These "Payable" accounts are not part of the regular Accounts Payable Ledger although called "Payable" but only temporary and are not subject to the credit and payment terms of the regular Accounts Payable. They instead are subject to the terms of either a policy or salary reduction agreement. For example the insurance premiums have a due date and the FWT and FICA have a "deposit by" deadline. These temporary "Payables" are cleared accordingly. If you can pay some by a deadline (whether next day deposit or otherwise), it means that the amounts are already segregated. If you want to know the amount just look at the bottom of any Payroll. If you can pay any 1 you can all the others too. I suspect that this is the basis behind the new DoL approach since next day deposit etc is now well understood.

You still have not addressed the time issue. Nothing in your reply indicates how come $400,000 has been incurred in just a few days. So I am very much in doubt that there could be a loss as yet. If the loss has not yet ocurred, the employer could just change to formulary and only allow medication that can be afforded. Whatever drug it is that costs $400,000 in less than 1 month undoubtedly has alternatives that would cost a fraction and work just as well or even better. Do you know what drug it is? Do you know why the stop loss insurer will not cover it? Probably because it is experimental or not proven as yet. If so there should be proven and effective alternatives. If so, the PD should also have prohibited it. Changing or ceasing the Plan is always an option if the PD etc say so. I have seen badly written documents tha had no "change or terminate" clause. If the costs really have been incurred (which I doubt) then the debt is owed and bankruptcy might be the solution, but be aware that not every debt can be discharged in a corporate bankruptcy especially in this case. So I would quickly find out what all the options are. I must tell you that I get the impression that you are really not involved in either the problem or the solution, but have some other reason for your interest. I say so because of the lack of details and your delay in responding. If however anyone is depending on you I suggest that you expedite whatever you are doing. The reason being that if $400,000 is spent in a few weeks, How much more is being spent as we speak? How much more could be incurred while options are being explored? It seems that regardless of the eventual decision, action has to be taken immediately.

I assume you mean determination letter. But addressing it to TPA is for delivery of the letter. Look at the content. It could just as well have been addressed to the client's lawyer if he was the one who had mailed in the request. It would not mean that if the client changed lawyers the letter would be violated etc.

pax, That was a curiousity creating BTW. What's up with that? I would hate to think that vebaguru is right on some points.