Lou S.

Sounds like you need to talk to your client and get some more facts. Is this Plan top-heavy? Were all the employees terminated or did the Plan just terminate. If you do make PS wont that go to employees too? It sounds like she's the only HCE so I'm assuming you'd have a testing failure if shes the only one getting PS.

When were the deferrals withheld? If they were withheld after 3/15 termination you have a problem of ineligible deferrals. If they were withheld before 3/15 but deposited in December you have late deferrals. As an HCE, even if they are refunded under 415 or ADP they are still considered annual additions for the Plan Year and they are also included in the ADP test, but you don't need to refund them twice. What did the termination amendment say about the limitation year?

It would seem that gains or losses on the contribution from the time it is deposited in the plan to the time it is allocated to participants accounts should be allocated at that time.. But as David Rigby points out, it's probably spelled out in the Plan document.

It sounds like the discontinued the match for 2019 in 2019 and the plan allows for that as it seems to be discretionary. But without reading the Plan Document I can't bee 100% sure.

She was w-2 employee right? 2019 deferrals are over you can't retroactively defer the catch-up now.

This is a professional message board and most of us are hired by Plan Sponsors to assist in maintaining the qualified status of their plan. Whether that makes us "pro management" is debatable but they are the ones who typically pay our fees. I personally have very little experience with ESOPs it is not my area of expertise, that said I would recommend you call around to ERISA law firms and ask if they have someone on staff with experience with ESOP valuations and litigation between agreived participants and management. Present them the facts as you know them and ask if there is a case to be made. And like Bill Presson, I think ESOP Guy has already given you a fair amount of very good information and advice to start.

If you are asking can you do it, the answer is yes. If you are asking if you are still considered a safe harbor plan for the current year the answer is probably no since you are reducing the safe harbor formula mid year. That would mean ADP/ACP testing and not deemed not-top-heavy exemption. FWIW I think this should be a case where you are still considered SH for the year but it doesn't seem to fit the black letter of the law.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the AFN distribution timing, like the SAR, is tied to the due date of the 5500. So if the 5500 gets an extension, don't those Notices also get an extension? EDIT scratch that. 120 days after PYE.

How do you not notice for 5 years that no 401(k) deductions are coming out of your pay check? And how do you not ask for a statement for the 401(k) account you thought you signed up for? There are IRS fixes for failure to implement a deferral election but you probably have to show that you did turn in a valid enrollment form that your employer failed to implement. That said the fact that you are just now bringing this up 5 years later will likely not work in your favor.

If converting to a lump sump at termination, you can use the DC method in the year of the lump sum distribution, even if they had been taking installments to satisfy the DB RMD in prior years.

ARA is requesting a 120 day extension of the deadline. I'd be surprised if it's not granted but who knows. As others have said this is the government after all.

I would recommend to the Trustees that they seek counsel on their fiduciary duty to possibly have an interim valuation, particularly if there are distributions that may represent a sizeable portion of the Plan assets. But since we are not a fiduciary, it would only be a suggestion. That said if Trustees do pay out large balances based on inflated 12/31 values and the remaining participants should pursue a lawsuit, do you think the TPA will not also be named in such a law suit and need to retain counsel, even if just to try to separate themselves from said lawsuit?

Assuming his PC is not a controlled or affiliated service group with the other entities he can establish and fund a DB plan based on his unrelated self-employment income. If he funds the SEP for 2020 he could cause deduction issues with a DB plan and or qualification issues for the SEP if he's using the standard IRS Form 5305-SEP which doesn't allow you to maintain another qualified plan in the same year. A prototype or individually designed SEP might have different results but you might still run in to the same deduction issues if he puts more than 6% of pay into the SEP. If he doesn't fund the SEP at all, the DB plan should be fine for 2020. In 2021 is his only income as an employee from the company with the 401(k) Plan? That is he no longer has income from his unrelated PC employer? If that's the case then a qualified plan of any kind outside his employer's 401k plan is a probable non-starter. If the hospital plan is a 403(b) plan I'm not totally sure on the 415 limit implications.

The documents need coordinating language on how and where the top heavy benefit will be provided. If it is silent, it is likely the top-heavy benefit would need to be provided in both plans. I would suggest reading both plan documents. EDIT - though it sounds like participants may be getting both the DC TH-min and the DB TH-min anyway from your description. And if the 401(k) plan says the TH is satisfied in the DB that's fine.

People who turned 70.5 prior to 12/31/2019 have a first RMD year of 2019 RMD and contine to have RMDs "under the old rules" People who do not turn 70.5 until after 12/31/2019 come under the new rules and do not have a first RMD year until the year they attain age 72.

Well it's not quite that you can't use a QNEC the trouble is the QNEC needed to be made by the end of the Plan Year since that's the 12 months following the testing period. At least that's the way I understood the rule but it never seemed to have much practical application. You could have amended to current year testing if you wanted to do QNEC but too late for that now for 2019.

While I agree with you some clients are old fashioned and somehow they are tied to the check book still.

If the wife is rolling it from her late husband's account in the plan to her own account in the plan then yes a 1099-R with code G will be required. Possibly 4G I haven't double checked the instructions on death benefit rollovers.

I'd guess you are looking at an -11(g) amendment to bring some other folks in and it may be expensive. I believe this is why HCEs are often excluded from Davis-Bacon contributions to avoid nasty end of year surprises on testing.

Yes. Prevailing wage contributions are employer contributions subject to nondiscrimination testing.

What does the plan document say? I would think most plans would treat that as a change in classification and the service in one class would count toward eligibility in the other when they changed classification.

If your plan uses the 1000 hour rule and work 1000 in the year you will be credited with a year of vesting service, regardless of when the record keeper gets verification of you working 1000 hours in the plan year.

Do you have any other IRAs? One option might be to roll over the pre-tax basis to your new 401(k) and rollover the after tax basis to and IRA then immediately convert that IRA to the Roth-IRA. Tis wroks if you have no other IRAs. But none of here have enough information about your personal situation to give a complete answer.

Yes it's possible to use full year compensation. On mid-year entry, it would depend on your definition of compensation and whether or not preparticipation compensation is included or excluded. Lastly is the match defined as "per payroll" or "annual"?

Presumably in that case the taxpayer would be on extension and you could use the taxpayers automatic extension no? But you might have a 9/15 filing deadline in some cases instead of 10/15. I mean assuming FYE=CYE=PYE.