Lou S.

A lot to consider. Is the Plan PBGC? The Minimum Required Contribution is not the same as the contribution credit under the Plan document. As others have noted the Contribution credit will depend on whether or not participants have meet the accrual requirements in the document before the freeze and/or termination date, with 204(h) notice of course. The Minimum Required Contribution for the year will be dependent on the funded status of the Plan and would be prorated if the termination creates a short plan year.

You need to convince them it's the same Plan and get them to do a trustee-to-trustee transfer. This can be difficult in many cases and can require quite the back and forth with documentation and often times escalating it to higher management to get it done right.

I'm not a CPA but my understanding is the number on box 14a of the K-1 is the number that goes on to the Schedule SE for determining SE taxes and as such is "pensionable" earned income. I don't think you need to audit the CPAs work as to how they got there unless that's part of your service agreement.

Is it subject to Self-Employment taxes for services provided or is it passive real estate income not subject to SE taxes?

I'm not an employment lawyer but I'd assume that you would reduced the elective deferral so as not run a negative check for the cycle. That is if the employer elected $200 but there is only $150 after required deduction you withhold the $150 and give him a net $0 check.

You'll always need a Schedule SB for the contribution year, signed and delivered to the Plan Sponsor. If it's an EZ the SB isn't filed with IRS but is maintained and subject to audit. If it's adopted in 2022 for 2021 under the SECURE Act your first required filing is 2022 Plan year (assuming you are over $250K) in which case you attach the 2021 and 2022 SB to the 2022 filing but if it's an EZ you don't attach the SBs. In your last example, it would depend if you are filing on a cash basis or accrual basis whether or not you are over $250,000 for the 2022 plan year for purposes of required EZ.

Peter, I'm guessing even the minimum will be beyond what this client wants to pay since they didn't file 2020 and don't want to file 2021. And while it should be a "cheap" audit by audit standards it could still be expensive by zero asset plan standards. If the TPA has a good relationship with some accounting firms, particularly if they refer other business their way, they might be able to get a discount of this one knowing it will be super simple. But since this isn't even a 401(k) Plan I still don't understand why they don't (or didn't) terminate it, since under SECURE, they can always adopt a new plan up until the due date of their tax return.

DFVC a Form 5500-SF for 2020 since it was due even though there were $0 assets. Yes they have an audit for 2021 as you have move than 120 participants on the first day of the plan year. Should be the cheapest easiest audit in history one would suppose. Why does the Plan exist? Should it be terminated? Yes it has filing requirements as long as it exists.

What does your document say? Typically in these situations the documents calls for a refund of deferrals and earnings to the extent possible to correct the 415 excess. A 1099-R is issued with I believe code E for the refund. This is so that the employee is not limited in what employer contribution they receive. Though I think some documents may be worded to limit the allocation of employer contributions instead.

Sounds like a problem. If everyone is in their own rate group and you were cross testing and it passed gateway and 401(a)(4) that could make sense. But doesn't make any sense in an integrated allocation where you can't even use the 3% SHNEC as part of the PS base, I'm not sure how you passed testing with only the HCE owner benefiting.

Forfeitures are $X Declare a PS contribution of $X. Reduce the amount of contributions to the trust by $X. Allocate $X to participants.

As I understand it you need the same plan year to combo test the DB/DC so unless you are terminating the DC plan the same date as the DB plan I would think think you would want to make the termination December 31 if you want to combo test the DB/DC together. Maybe someone else has a different opinion. And since this sounds like SH 401(k) unless you meet one of the exceptions, operating at economic loss, or qualified business transaction (generally selling the company) you'll lose the safe harbor status for the year of termination if it's not 12 months.

Scenario 1. Taking monthly AB * 12 is typically what we do and then tell them to take the subsequent RMDs in the same month each future year. Scenario 2. I'm not sure I follow your question. He made an election for how he is taking his benefit and that would continue.

As long as you are consistent and do a final true up at year end, I don't see a problem with doing it through out the year other than it could be more complicated and more chance for potential errors.

It's no longer in a qualified retirement plan once the annuity is purchased so employment status will be irrelevant. Contacts will need to comply with 401(a)(9).

I think Bird is right.

I don't think it falls under the clearly approved mid-year SF amendments and you'd be safer making the change 1/1.

There may be some facts and circumstances that would give weight to the argument that the person in question who did not receive compensation for the entire year was still in fact employed and did performer services for the period. I'm not a lawyer and wouldn't want to argue said facts before an IRS auditor if it came to it.

I believe you can roll to an inherited IRA and retain the death benefit exemption from the 10% tax. But if the spouse treats it as his or her own it loses the death benefit status.

3 plans or 3 accounts? It sounds like you were going from pooled to individually directed accounts and changing the Plan sponsor.

Good question. You may want to contact EFAST directly for an answer. One approach might be to file an AMENDED return with the correct EIN in Box 2b, and complete section 4 with the incorrect EIN in 4b of the original filing.

I think they are excluded from the test since from your original post it appears they have "not performed services" even if they are not technically terminated.

You may be right but I think the largest first half of the year market drop since 1932 is bit more than "regular market volatility". That said, I don't see suspension of RMDs on the horizon for 2022 due to revenue concerns brought up earlier but who knows, maybe it gets slipped into Secure 2.0 and passes before the midterms. I just wouldn't be banking on it.

I'm pretty sure this was cited by congress both times they suspended RMDs. Now the 2nd time they did it, the market rebounded and then some in the same year but it was clearly the justification for it in the CARES act.

https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i5330 If you can show "reasonable cause" they may waive some or all the penalties. I don't know how successful reasonable cause letters are in getting the penalties waived.