Lou S.

I agree with you. I don't see it as eligible under 415.

No. You can't have any eligible participants other than owners and spouses to qualify as 1 participant EZ (or 1-part abbreviated SF).

I am not aware of any IRS guidance on this subject either. I would err on the side of caution and say the defaulted loan reduced his amount available for hardship as he never really had a distributable event when the loan defaulted. So I would say he only has $3,000 available now for hardship. But as I said, I'm not aware of any formal guidance. If someone does have a citation, that would be great.

Trifecta! I believe the VCP remedy is to make all the missed contributions with interest to make participants whole and submit a VCP application with the correction.

I think you still have to amend, but I don't think it needs to trigger a QNECs for other NHCEs. Though it is possible I missed an EPCRS change on this. The IRS Fix-it guide (updated July, 2014) indicates you can still amend under SCP but need to submit the amendment in the next DL cycle and identify it separately. I'm not sure how you do that on pre-approved plans where they no longer accept DL apps.

For truly large employers it really shouldn't be an issue. I mean they electronically transmit most employees pay via direct deposit and presumably get the payroll taxes transmitted on time too. There really should not be any impediment that I'm aware of to electronically transmit the 401(k) contributions on or about the pay date. For small employers it can be a time/cost issue. The cost of setting up an electronic transmission of the employer's 401(k) contributions in the vendors format might be prohibitive for some small employers and their may be someone in HR who along with their other duties has to manually enter the 401(k) deposits and wire (or send a check) to the 401(k) custodian and may need that 7 days leeway. It's the mid-size companies that are a bit more of a gray area. Though I think everyone might have a different idea of what a mid-size company is. At least that's kind of the feeling I get. Though I am by no means an expert in payrolls so my understanding could be a but faulty.

Corbel doc default is to have rehires eligible on date of rehire if they previously met the eligibility conditions.

If it were me, I'd just report them on 2014.

I agree with Tom. Which is easy to do because he's usually right.

I'm pretty sure that it required pro-ration of the Roth/traditional accounts but the latest IRS Notice 2014-54 may have the clarity you are looking for.

With everyone in their own allocation group and presumably a pick and choose formula I don't really see how you get around the gateway.

Probably. They are most likely going to want something from the TPA and/or client authorizing them to do it. I know we've done it with a few packaged vendors and they all have slightly different procedures. Some are easier to work with than others.

See instructions to form 1099-R it is explained in detail. You can also search this site, I think there are few threads that covered this, possibly even one started by me. Essentially you need to notify them to pull the money out of the IRA and send them amended 1099-Rs since a portion was not eligible for refund.

I think IRS Publication 590 will answer all of your questions. http://www.irs.gov/publications/p590/ As to the conversion it depends on if you have other existing IRA accounts or not as to the tax treatment of conversion and what portion is considered conversion of basis and what portion is considered conversion of income.

Not to be callous but this is really not your problem. Couple of ideas - Borrow the funds against the real estate assets? Pay back with next year's tax refund. Rollover what she can, pay taxes on what she can't. Have them request a private letter ruling from IRS.

Figure the government would make it overly complicated. Looks like your are right. It's been a while since I looked up 457 rules we simply don't do them often enough. http://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Plan-Participant,-Employee/Retirement-Topics-457b-Contribution-Limits

Unless there has been some law change that I am unaware of they decoupled the 403(b)/401(k) limit from the 457 limit years ago. So yes you can max 403(b)/401(k), including catchup and 457 plus catchup as well. You still can't max both 403(b) and 401(k) those limits are still aggregated by individual SSN.

If your system has "stock" PPA, HEART & WRERA you might just save yourself some time and have the client sign those 3 amendments with the PPA doc. But as for your suggestion, sorry I have no experience with trying that.

Does your plan document have language to automatically "top up" participants to the gateway minimum regardless of other allocation conditions? If the answer is yes you don't need an amendment; if the answer is no you do need an amendment.

The Bold is probably not going to help your claim. As others have said though you may or may not have a claim. If you believe you do, talk to a trail attorney with ERISA experience.

If the participant died prior to the RBD and the spouse is younger, they can roll it to an IRA and treat it as their own as opposed to non-spouse beneficiary that must treat it as an inherited IRA. That is they can delay distributions until they actually reach as 70 1/2 and must beginning RMDs. That is to say, spousal beneficiaries generally have some options not available to non-spouse beneficiaries.

It should be addressed in the Plan Document defining compensation but if it is not, I would error on the side of the participant truing up match YTD if employed at the end of the quarter. Alternatively I'd write up admin procedures that address specifically what compensation is used for what period of the true up calc for the client to sign off on.

Matching contributions to a 401 (k) can be made a few ways as I understand it - 1 - Along with the 401(k) with each payroll. 2 - Periodically (monthly, quarterly, annually) In any event you'd need to make them by the due date of the company's tax return (with extensions) for them to be deductible. I'm not aware of any qualified plan where you can defer deposit of the matching contribution until an employee is eligible for a distribution, that sound more like a non-qualified deferred comp plan to me. It is possible the consultant is talking about putting a receivable (or accrued) matching contribution on a per payroll basis on the statements for participants but funding the actual match just once a year before filing the taxes, similar to a PS contribution. We used to do that all the time in pooled quarterly balanced forward plans but I don't think it is as common these days in individual accounts on some platform. I'd ask the consultant to clarify what they are trying to convey.

Yes offering lump sums to actives on Plan Termination is legal. No problem at all.

Legally - sure. Is it allowed by the terms of the Plan Document and the Prudential service agreement, that's the real question. Also as has been stated, who will do the 1099-R reporting if Schwab does the rollover direct?