Lou S.

Allowed, yes. Advisable I'll leave that to others. As to where and how it is stored, it could be a Prohibited Transaction if not stored and held by a non-party in interest. Since gold bullion is not a "qualified asset" you may have higher bonding requirements and would not be able to file a Form 5500-SF.

Again, assuming this is participant directed, if the funds all came out of one TDF, and the participant does not change their investment mix for future deposits, every platform I have ever worked with the repayments would be back to the same TDF. I suppose there are situations where this might be different, but I do not think they would be common norms or industry standards. The entire payment, both principal and interest, is re-deposited into the participant's account, unless there is some admin fee applied to the payment before deposit or the loan is treated as a pooled investment which is no longer very common. Typically the loan accounting will take the prior outstanding balance, add interest to it from the last payment and then apply the payment to reduced the outstanding balance. Each loan system might be a little different in how they apply this but it's all going to be pretty close.

Yes then to use an example if you have 1 HCE and 3 NHCs with the HCE and 2 NHCEs are getting 7% and one NHCE getting 3% they all are "benefiting" as they all got actual dollars. But if you are testing on a contribution basis then anyone getting less than 7% is not benefit for 401(a)(4) and your ratio would be less than 70%. So you can either test on a benefits basis and see if it passes (assuming you can pass all tests for this), you have fail safe language in the document which will pull in enough people at 7% to get to you to 70%, or if no fail safe an -(11)(g) amendment to pick an chose who gets the extra to get you to 70%.

Is the PS contribution more than the 3% TH minimum?

Contact John Hancock for a source correction. It's not that complicated and they might even be able to do it as of the deposit date so the earnings work out right. Talk to your account rep, they can probably walk you through it.

https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/simple-ira-plan-fix-it-guide-your-business-sponsors-another-qualified-plan I believe you are correct unless you want to try to go through VCP for the SIMPLE IRA since it's the SIMPLE-IRA that has problems if you also maintain a qualified retirement plan in the same year. There might be some threads here on benefits link if you do a search, I think this has come up a few times in threads.

§401(a)(9) sends you §416 which sends you to §318 for attribution which is used for RMDs. For purposes of the RMD rules he owns the stock of his children, just like HCE determination. It is different for Controlled Groups but be happy the RMDs were properly done and you don't have to go back for missed RMDs under VCP.

It's facts and circumstances. Document why it took longer then one year so you can address it with the IRS if they bring it up on audit but what actions are they likely to take? Unwind the termination and make you re-terminate? Where it might be an issue is where you drag out the term past some new required amendment dates but typically I've never seen the IRS challenge a term if it took "a little longer than a year" but if you terminated in 2023 and pay everyone out by the end of 2024 I can't see where the IRS would ever be likely to challenge unless there were other issues with the Plan. That's not to say they couldn't be sticklers, I just think you'd have to have an auditor having a very bad day try to impose that rule which is a guideline as I understand it an not in the code. If they did do that you could always kick it up to a supervisor.

You can withdrawal funds from your IRA and roll them back tax free if you do it within 60 days of the withdrawal, but there is a limit of 1 rollover like this per year. And I forget it if it is once per calendar year, once in any 12 month period, or if both apply. I also don't recall if this rule aggregates all of the IRAs you many have or if each one is separate if you have multiple IRAs. I can't comment on whether or not this is a good strategy, just one that is available.

If it is only one participant and he is over 59.5, then yes getting any kind of evidence that the first ROTH contribution was 5 or more years ago should be sufficient to process as a qualified ROTH distribution and you can breath a huge sigh of relief. And old W-2 should ROTH 401(k) or a statement such as Paul suggests should do the trick. If you have other participants with ROTH, you have bigger issues with determining the ROTH basis and first year of ROTH contribution for all similarly situated participants I'd suggest a retainer billed in advance if you have to do a massive project to reconstruct that because the prior TPA/Custodian/record keeper, either didn't track it or didn't transmit it and the Plan Sponsor who is also probably the Plan Administrator seems negligent in it's duties with respect to service provides some how.

Request copies of his W-2 from 5 and 6 years ago?

I don't believe it is impermissible under the Internal Revenue Code, at least I've never found anything that says you can't, but it might be prohibited by the Plan's Trust documents, Investment Policy and/or the Plan Trustee who oversees the investments. If it is allowed by the Plan document and the Trustee will allow it, they you do have all the pitfalls you mentioned and possibly several more which can be quite easy to run a foul of and while I'm not an accountant I think you might lose some of the advantages allowed in the code, like depreciation of the asset which oddly I think applies to race horses for tax purposes. It is not something I'd be interesting in touching, even if it was technically allowed, but you might find someone out there who would, though it might come with additional record keeping fees.

If he's already contributed $55,000 to the DC plan for 2023, you are going to have problems deducting a $140,000 contribution to a DB plan unless there are employees that would make this a PBGC plan due to the combined plan deduction limit. If he hasn't made any 2023 contribution and is on extension, limit the DC contribution (not including 401(k), if any) to 6% of pensionable pay. If you are setting up for 2024, talk to the plan actuary before making any contributions to either plan to make sure you don't get into nondeductible contribution issues.

Oh that's different. I don't recall if hardship is a protected benefit, you may or may not be able to amend that out, but if the Plan has in service at 59 1/2 and/or severance of employment already you'll need to preserve that for all current participants at least for funds currently in the plan and any earnings thereon or you'll have a prohibited 411 cutback. Accounting for pre and post amendment balances by source for all participants seems a nightmare and just asking for trouble. Oh and then telling folks that some of their is available when they terminate and the rest when they turn 65? That sounds like a fun conversation.

Make sure the owners know that the no pre-65 distribution rule also applies to them as well as any "executives" then might hire.

A plan can allow for no distribution prior to normal retirement age. Though I believe that's much more common in a DB plan with annuity only options. I don't see why you couldn't do it in a safe harbor 401(k) Plan, but I'm not sure you should do it.

The surplus isn't that small. We'll know YTD payroll in a couple weeks and and can compare Plan assets to hypothetical balances and can do a Plan amendment to eat up most if not all of the surplus in a nondiscriminatory 2024 pay credit. The pay credits were frozen as 12/31/23 with this potential in mind. But judging by the responses so far I think we'll make a push to get the participants paid out in Q3 and then terminate the Plan.

Haven't come across this one before but just trying to get the timing right with the PBGC and required participant notification- Small Cash Balance Plan fewer than 10 current and former participants with balance, owner died last year, his widow inherited the shares (she is now the 100% owner and the Plan Trustee she also has a pending death benefit as beneficiary) and the business has been running under a prior contract but that contact is running out so all employees remaining employees were given notice and end of June will be the last payroll. The company is staying in business through the end of the year at least to wrap any loose ends and such and for compliance reasons terminating effective December 31 might make the most sense from a compliance and testing standpoint. The plan allows for distributions upon termination of employment so what happens if we pay out all the participants before we go through a formal PBGC termination? The plan is well funded all PBGC premiums are up to date and there is a small surplus that will be allocated to participants per the document. I've never done a PBGC termination after all participants are paid out, assuming they can get all terminated employees paid out relatively quickly. Is that going to be a problem with the PBGC? I know you are not suppose to payout active employees during the PBGC review and termination process but these will all be terminated vested as of 6/30/24. So it seems we could pay them all out.

Let them know you'll be buying an annuity with a QJSA unless they can get you a finalized QDRO? They can't hold the Plan termination hostage by saying we don't have a QDRO 2 years on.

Definitely not my area of expertise but if the farm has been in the family for 200 years, wouldn't there have been some step-up in basis along the way as prior owners passed on and left their sharers or interest to future generations? It sounds like you need a good tax accountant who is well versed in family business transfer and sale and that's not really the focus of this board. On the bright side, long term capital gains tax rates are much lower than ordinary income taxes, at least at the federal level, state taxation may vary from state to state quite a bit.

And amendment can't be effective for the year if it has a prohibited cutback of benefits. Adding after-tax is an expansion of benefits so should be fine. Though it will be subject to ACP testing, just so you are aware in case you were not. The second part is a bit trickier if you can do it or not. If anyone is entitled to an allocation under the old formula you won't be able to change the formula until next year. However, if no one has yet earned the right to the allocation formula then you could amend this year. generally speaking if your current plans has a last day requirement or an hours requirement that no one has yet met you could do the amendment effective in the current year, provided it's adopted before anyone has accrued a right to the old formula. Safe harbor 401(k) plans have a few additional levels of hoops to satisfy where you might not be able to make the change even with a last day requirement, you'd have to double check on that one if that's you situation.

Yes if she's leaving for disability the code would be different and you follow the plan terms to determine total and permanent disability. But the OP says the participant is leaving/retiring in 2024 at the age of 56, so if the only issue if the 10% penalty then no need to even worry about disability definitions since they are separating after age 55 and qualify for the waiver if the payment is from the plan to them and not through a conduit IRA.

How do you enter into a collective bargaining agreement and not keep a copy? Yes you can file a late 1099-R, as you have discovered, penalties apply. The participant is probably fine as the taxable amount will be $0 if it was properly rolled over. But the plan has a duty to file the 1099-R and supply to the participant. At most he'd need an amended return showing ~$1.5M distribution, but report it as non taxable rollover.

If deferrals started with payroll but couldn't be deposited because of the custodian, you have late deposits. Simply deposit the payments along with the lost earnings, file the 5330 and decide if you are going to though the DOL late contribution program or not. If the deferrals didn't start you can calculate a QNEC on the missed deferral opportunity and deposit that, but I think you might just be able to self correct and start the deferrals 3/22 as the delay was "short" and folks have 9 months to catch-up the missed deferral opportunity.

No 10% penalty if taken from the plan if on account of separation after age 55. 1099-R code would be 2. Plan's NRA doesn't matter in this case, just the age at which he separates service.