Lou S.

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?

Show the early January payments as a payable at 12/31/14? Not sure if technically correct but we've done that in the past when 1 or 2 final distributions are paid the 1st week of January due to "processing delays" with the fund house. Or stick to your guns and show assets at 12/31/14 and tell then they can file the final return for 2015 themselves or pay you to do it.

The excess deferral (over 402(g) limit) is taxable in the year deferred, so that get's code P. The loss is reported on the 2015 tax return but because it is a loss, no 1099-R, just the letter. see page 6 & 7 of the instructions http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1099r.pdf an example might help - Say participant has $1,000 excess deferral for 2014 with $100 loss. Part gets a check for $900 (say on 2/2/15) Part gets a 1099-R (in Jan 2016) indicating $1,000 taxable in 2014 (code - P). But has to claim it on the 2014 return filed by 4/1/15 (or later if extended) Part uses letter to claim $100 loss on 2015 tax return. same facts but $100 gain instead of loss. Part gets a 1099-R (in Jan 2016) indicating $1,000 taxable in 2014 (code - P) But has to claim it on the 2014 return filed by 4/1/15 (or later if extended) Part gets a 1099-R (in Jan 2016) indicating $100 taxable in 2015 (code - 8) Adjust your years if you are doing 2014 1099-Rs now for stuff that happened last year. It is kind of screwy in my opinion but I'm not the IRS. I like how they simplified all the other refunds to "year received". Was really wacky when you used to have non calendar year plans with part of the refund taxable 2 years ago, good times. Always nice explaining to a participant why then now need to file an amended tax return from 2 years ago for a failed test now.

Don't you mean 2014 for the bold? If so, I agree. Not and HCE for 2014 based on facts presented. If they earned over $115K in 2014 they would be HCE in 2015, partner or no. Unless using the TGP and they aren't in the TPG.

You are correct. It is a different source and should be tracked as such. The only way they'd be 100% is if the vesting schedule was already 100% on that type of match and you are now changing it to 3 year cliff. If non-safe harbor match was already 3 year cliff, then that's the schedule it would go on.

Can you ask the fund house for the value on the date journaled?

I'd say technically they are supposed to get it. However, there is little to no liability exposure in not giving it to them since they have no account balance you can't really have a fiduciary breech for not investing their $0 properly. The downside risk is a 0% contributor changes their election after the QDIA notices are sent but gets defaulted into the QDIA when they start their contributions.

The quarterly requirements are for those with account balances. The annual notices are for all eligible participants with or without account balance.

Run a short year ADP test on 10/1 - latest payroll? That is the missed deferral period. If not an option, are you allowed to use prior year ADP as proxy to correct?

I'm with you. I thought to accept ROTH-rollover or do in-Plan Roth conversions, you also had to offer the ability to make ROTH-401(k).

You have different rates of match for different groups of ees than you have BRF testing.

Send it back as an error.

ESOP Guy, like you I thought common law marriage was an anachronism but wiki tells me some states still recognize it and the Federal Government will recognize it if the state does. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage_in_the_United_States If the OP is looking for "proof of marriage" perhaps asking for a copy of their tax return indicated they are filing as married might suffice. They can redact income information on P1 of 1040.

Yes. It sounds like a poorly worded article.

What does the document say? If they are eligible when they return under the document the procedures on changing elections would govern as they are a non-contributing participant who elected a 0% deferral rate. I'm assuming this is a 401(k) plan, though perhaps that's a faulty assumption on my part.

They are correcting it like he never deferred due to the clerical error. You need to amend the W-2 since he didn't actually defer the 100% of pay previously reported on his W-2. If this didn't cross reporting years you could probably just fix in the next payroll cycle.

Does the 5500 even allow cents? Would $0.06 round down to $0?

Basis recovery is tax free. Distribution is NOT eligible ROTH distribution because part is not 59 1/2 so the earnings are taxed as ordinary income + 10% penalty (unless one of the exceptions to 10% penalty applies).