Lou S.

If they are eligible under the terms of the plan and have not terminated service at the end of the plan year, then they are counted as participants.

The company could have it's own plan provided it passes all IRS discrimination testes based on all employees of the controlled group. If it is large enough I might meet the QSLOB rules. I've never heard anything about having their own SIC code having any real meaning with respect to Qualified Plans.

Assuming the prior fee notices were good, I don't see a problem with a supplemental notices to the effect of - we have negotiated a fee reduction as follows with our current provider retroactive to March 1, 2014.

John don't forget, yf they merge in the MP they need to keep the J&S requirements (and other distribution characteristics of MP money) on those assets, some folks don't want that. Biener, if you want folks to be able to take distributions, you need to terminate and distribute - sort of all or nothing. If you freeze, then you need to leave ALL the money in the plan, continue to maintain document, continue to file 5500s. Virtually no active participants would be able to roll out of the plan in that case because MP plans have very strong restrictions on taking in service distributions before the later of NRA or age 62.

If you don't distribute all assets in a timely manner, generally with in one year, the IRS will deem the plan not terminated. So short answer, no they can't leave it in the plan.

Other than a 1099-R for the participant I'm not sure what there would be to report.

The 5310 came out in December and there was a 6 month window where you could use the old form. Not sure is there is a similar window on the 5307 as the IRS seems to be discouraging 5307 submissions in most cases.

It is similar to the new questions on the 5310 that I'm currently struggling with the same questions.

A Cash Balance plan is generally a type of DB plan qualified under 401(a) so yes they are absolutely subject to QDROs. Typically speaking yes the hypothetical account balance is the amount due a participant though there could be some circumstances where it might be higher.

Not true. The security issue at the time the loan is issued.

I think some one is misremembering the rules back to the 1990s when matching contributions for self-employed were treated as deferrals for the 402(g) limit. As you say whether you call it a PS or Match it has little difference in a solo-K (regardless or whether it is ROTH or regular) as the employer contributions are always non-ROTH, though you could do in plan conversion to ROTH is plan allows and participant wants to pay the taxes.

What ESOP guy said. No audit, you haven't filed. As soon as you file the plan w/o an audit you'll get almost immediate request from IRS/DOL to file the audit.

Moving in could require 1st, last and deposit. That might be a "hardship" for the participant who may be able to meet the monthly rent but doesn't have the upfront cash to get into the place. That's just a guess on my part and doesn't really help with the allowable question. If the guy is going to be put on the street by his Aunt, I'd be willing to stretch the definition of "avoid eviction" if it was my own plan but I'm not sure I'd be comfortable giving that advice to someone elses plan.

I could be wrong but I think you can self correct if you get spousal consent.

I see no problem.

If you can get the QDRO amended to make the first payment satisfy the order, that's probably the best but I'm not sure the parties will want to pay an attorney to draft that amendment. What about getting both parties to simply sign a statement saying that reciept of payment #1 on dd/mm/yy fully satisfies QDRO order? And keep that in the file with the QDRO? Lastly you could take the no harm-no foul approach assuming the QDRO is all good and the payment recieved is what the alt payee was supposed to get anyway and treat it as an "minor administartive error" that is who ever processed it thought the draft was final. Anyway those are just some ideas, not sure is any is "best answer".

We've done this on some cases. In the case of bankrupcy, there is usually a bankruptcy trustee who can sign, though the retirment plan is not allways the top priority when a company goes belly up.

If the employer just stops taking deferrals they aren't follwing the terms of the plan. Very likely the employer is having financial dificulties.

A SEP is treated like a DC plan. That is to say you can't skirt the decudtion limit by putting in a SEP instead of a PSP.

How do you stop taking deferrals in a 401(k) plan? Do they want to amend from 401(k) to PS? You couldn't do this in safe harbor plan as it would be a mid-year amendment, assuming this is a calendar year plan. Unless they are terminating the plan you couldn't make this effective prior to the start of the next plan year.

The easiest way might be to forfiet his account and use it to offset the next deposit. Company writes him a check for the deferral. (or do a negative defferal if payroll company will allow) Fix the W-2 with the payroll company to reflect no 401(k). Adjust his withholding on the next payroll to cover the taxes that weren't taken.

It is required.

You might want to test that interim val for BRF as I'm guessing most of the folks with >5% of the assets are HCEs.

I would simply report them on e(2) {if you treat the PBGC as an insurance company} or e(3) {Other - type in PBGC} as payments to provide benefits.

No. The MP assets must retain their J&S characteristics.