Lou S.

LOL, that's why I said it's not always practical!

Not the best solution but if the Trustee is willing, have him/her drive to the participant's house for them to fill out the forms (with spousal consent of course). Not always practical I realize but can work in a pinch if participant is just being lazy and Trustee is motivated to get signed forms.

Unless they are married, I don't think they qualify. Which is odd because if they were both partners with the same percentage I think they would. See page 7 of the IRS instructions on who may file as 1 part-SF.

Think about this way. You have an employer who has only 10 employees, all participants each of whom own 10% of the company. Compensation for 1 & 2 is $500,000. Compensation for 3 - 10 is $300,000. The plan uses the TGP. There is no way you can argue that you only have 2 HCEs because of the TPG election. Not that it would matter in this case because all would be HCE but I think you get the point.

6 - you always add back in any 5% owners who are not HCEs by compensation after determining your HCEs with or without the TPG election.

Yeah normal is probably a better term. For a school district I can see the 9/1 - 8/31 making perfect sense for them as an employer. As to why other do it I'm not sure as I don't work with health plans but it is normal for retirement plans who want plan year and fiscal year to coincide for deduction reasons.

I think it is rather common to have a non-calendar year coverage period. Is your question about coverage on 1/1/14 and the individual mandate of ACA? If so there is a transition notice. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-13-42.pdf

Have you tried asking the old vendor if they have a from fro changing the name? If so getting that and sending in with another copy the asset transfer request may be the path of least resistance.

http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_DFVC.html I don't they are eligible after they are notified but this specifically mentions DOL and does not mention IRS so there may be an out.

I'm confused by some of your terminology. While the goal is often to have the employer contribution = to the contribution credit, it is not a requirement they be the same. Is this the 1st year of the plan?

I think I have a related question and not sure the answer. Participant terminates with $100,000 to total balance and is not 59.5 $100,000 total balance broken out as follows $80,000 pre-tax $15,000 roth basis (deferrals not conversion) $5,000 roth earnings Participant elects the following distributions on termination - $10,000 cash balance of pretax account to traditional IRA balance of roth account to roth IRA The question is can the $10,000 come all from pretax and roll the full $20,000 roth money to Roth IRA with no reduction in ROTH basis? Can the $10,000 call come from ROTH with $7,500 non-taxable recovery of basis and $2,500 non-qualified earnings subject to taxes and penalties. Or does the $10,000 have to split pro-rata between pre-tax and ROTH. making the $1,500 recovery of ROTH basis, $500 taxable roth earnings and $8,000 pretax taxable. Or something else? That is are ROTH accounts treated any differently that non-ROTH AFTER TAX monies in the plan? Did I mention I hate the IRS rules sometimes?

The audits we've had have asked for GUST and everything after. I suspect after PPA restatements become a bit more common they will ask for EGTRRA restatement and everything after but this is just my best guess.

That is accurate.

I could be wrong on this but I thought the owners of A got a proportional share of the ownership. If I'm correct on that then Joe's effective ownership of B would be 31.46 + (46.5 * 59.23%) = 54.23% so you satisfy the 50% identical ownership test. If 5 or fewer also have 80% control then you would be a CG.

I've never thought about it. We programed in the dates to our notice and I don't ever recall checking to see if it fell on a weekend or holiday. I think your sentence about next business day would be more than adequate.

Not according to the IRS FAQs Can I contribute to my SIMPLE IRA plan if I maintain another retirement plan? Generally, you can’t contribute to a SIMPLE IRA plan for a calendar year if you maintain another retirement plan and any of your employees receives an allocation or accrues a benefit under the other plan during that calendar year (the “one-plan requirement”). However, you can have a SIMPLE IRA plan even though you maintain another retirement plan if: The other plan is only for employees covered under a collective bargaining agreement, and the SIMPLE IRA plan excludes these employees; or Your business was part of an acquisition, disposition or similar transaction during the current calendar year or the 2 prior calendar years, and only your separate employees participate in the SIMPLE IRA plan. If you maintain another retirement plan and one of the exceptions above does not apply, you must correct this mistake.

I don't believe the right to make ROTH contributions is a protected benefit so I don't see any reason why you couldn't set up a ROTH source that does not accept new deposits in the accepting plan. That said I also don't have any formal IRS guidance to point you to. Perhaps someone else will have something more definitive.

I see no reason why the election forms should not be sent to the valid beneficiary. Send the form to the daughter.

Why not amend to have excess assets go to the participant? Seems silly to pay a confiscatory reversion tax given the facts you lay out.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i8955ssa.pdf Report as D on the plan they are leaving. Report as C on the plan they are going to.

Are you sure a valid QDRO wasn't filed in 1990? The reason I ask is I find it hard to believe that the CA pension fund would make payment to ex-wife w/o a valid QDRO. But yes for a valid QDRO the address (or last know address at least) and SSN of alternate payee are requirements. If you are getting QDRO now some 24 years later, you're probably going to have to have some contact with the ex-wife as I think the Plan is going to want her signature on the DRO. But I'm not a DRO expert, I know just enough to be dangerous sometimes.

We've always used the Sponsor ID and not the Trust ID in PBGC filings.

Yeah we used the old name one year by mistake (person preparing 5558s just missed the change) and then we had a small letter writing campaign to prove the 5558 was for the plan that was filed. Use the EIN/PN and Plan name you are going to file the 5500 under on the 5558.

What happens when the HR person is fired or leaves? It may or may not be a "big deal". If the HR person is a office of the company and know what he/she is getting into probably not a big deal. If the company is saying Oh by the way your our ERISA Plan Administrator to the person who calls in payroll, possible a big deal. Just my opinion.

Andy, I've never heard of a DB plan allowed to impose a last day requirement. My understanding an this could be wrong is that you have to accrue at least a partial benefit for anyone with 1000 hours worked in the computation period but your could require 2000 hours for a full accrual. Interestingly one of the top results in google for "db accrual last day requirement" is this only thread form 2008 on a similar topic. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?/topic/40165-allocation-conditions-in-cash-balance-plans/