Lou S.

Be prepared for a ton of menial processing.

ASPPA has recorded webcasts ($110 a pop for members with a discount if you have more than one person from same company ordering) that are generally 2 credits a piece and usually good for EA, ASPPA, ERPA, NIPA credit.

Been there done that it rarely works. Likely you will just generate larger ACP refunds. Why not just make the 3% NE or 4% match a safe harbor and be done with it?

How about a pooled account in the plan for participants with no SSN and allocate it to the SSN when they get one?

agree

I think you are going to fail the effective availability portion of the discrimination testing rules since it would effectively be available to a much higher percentage of HCEs than NHCEs

Yes there is an RMD. Calculated based on FMV of prior 12/31 I don't see a lot of insurance in plans but isn't insurance past NRA problematic from the incidental benefit rules? You have almost the same "problem" as if the participant's only asset is an illiquid asset. The likely options are distribute the whole policy to participant for full FMV, surrender the policy for CSV or have participant purchase policy from the plan and make RMD out of proceeds.

How is compensation defined for allocation purposes in the Plan document? Are these 2 separate plans each only adopted by one of the CG members or one plan with two divisions?

If you are your only employee a solo-401(k) will probably give you the most bang for your buck if your are looking for a deduction. For your other questions consider meeting with a qualified financial planner who can go over your specify questions.

This would be the correct way to go. Change the SH plan for 2014 and merge DC plan #2 in to SH plan in 2014. Draw back is addition expense for document, 2 5500s, merge documentation, etc.

Yes. You have 2 folks who need to benefit under that scenario to pass 401(a)(26) and you only have 1 benefiting. Plan should have been amended to allow for staff person to have an accrual in 2012.

New LLC, controlled group, sounds like it would fall into the exception for "business transactions". I haven't looked at them in a while but off the top of my head I don't think I'd have a problem having the LLC adopt the plan.

Getting spousal consent on the withdrawal should be sufficient. I don't see why he can't get the maximum or why you would have to pro-rate.

Ask them what part of 72(p)(2)© is unclear

I thought there was some clarification of the model amendments in 2012 and if you adopted them in 2012 based on IRS published guidence you are fine and don't need to re-adopt them. If you adopted them in 2009, you may want to reveiw the amendment against the final IRS model amedment to see if your amendment is up to snuff so to speak.

Doubt this is exactly what you are looking for but this http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/publications/401k_employee.html might help. What you are describing would seem to fall squarely under investment advisory fees that could typically be paid from the plan. Mr. Chrun might need to be a Registered Investment Advisor for it to work but beyond the royal PITA of logistics and notices, (and the usual question of is the fee reasonable) I don't see where this would be a problem.

Match can be used to offset top-heavy if provided in the plan document but can not be used to satisfy gateway.

Participant entered 7/1 with 0% deferral rate. Participant elected 10/15 so if feesible the election should be enfore 11/1 (first of the month following the change). I agree with everything ERISA said above, show them the summary plan description section that describeschanging future elections and ask them how you don't qualify? Then ask the TPA/record-keeper if they will be making the employer whole for the missed deferral opprtunity QNEC the employer may be required to make on your behalf or if they will be making the employer pay that? Copy the head of your HR department on the question to the TPA.

Typically you will want the QDRO worded something to the effect of -- 50% of martial protery as of (date of seperateration) adjusted for gain/(loss) until time of segregation to alternate payee account or payout to alternate payee.

Seems like a victim of the document and the way the match is being done but sounds like the system is simply following the terms of the plan document.

Yes. I've seen it in seminars and such but never though I've never presonally used it in practice.

Sounds like it should be easy to do. Unfortuately I'm not seeing anything in the regs that easily allows 0% < HCE match rate < SHMAC rate. If someone does no of a provsion that would fit into it, I'd be interesed to see it too as that would make a select few employers somewhat happy.

I see election forms that are 0% but the particpant elects investments for any employer contribution such as profit sharing or non elective safe harbor.

If the plan documnet allows a seperate election for bonus or allows you to change percentage on any payroll there would not be any problem doing what you propose. If the plan document limits the frequency of chnages to something like first of each quarter, you would have a problem with the terms of the plan document.

I'm not sure if you can have a greater of formula for SH match but if you can you do a greater of 100% of deferral up to $2,000 or standard SH formula. Clearly the first formula would only apply to employees making less than $66.7K. In case you have owner HCEs making less than that amount you might want to exclude HCEs from first part of that. Now if that doesn't satisfy SH you can still do it but I think that opens your match to ACP testing. It is clearly an interesting situation that porbably wasn't contemplated by the IRS when setting up SH plan rules as this is the kind of design that is going to favor low paid employees.