Bill Presson

Make a profit sharing contribution that passes the a4 tests.

Why are those few months really needed? Can’t we all just wait until January 1?

I've been pretty critical of some professionals on here, but I think the "I am a Law Student" would allow for a bit of grace, perhaps? I realize we aren't here to give free advice to outsiders in divorce situations, but no need to answer if you weren't feeling it.

Also depends on what your document says about how to correct the failure. Some give specific instructions and some are silent. You should prefer the document be silent. That way you have all the options available.

I agree that it’s a better solution but I don’t like it. It’s only better because it’s outside the plan.

My primary concern is not with a divorce lawyer that doesn't understand retirement plans, but one that apparently won't even acknowledge it and bring in someone else. It's just ridiculous.

Get a different lawyer.

Pretty sure the 5500 only deals with participants and not employees. Also a 5500 usually deals with a single plan. It’s possible that plan could have more than one benefit but it may not have all benefits. And not all benefits have enough participants to require reporting on a 5500. While 5500s and 990s are technically public documents, it’s bad form to identify an employer on the board.

Someone with expertise in welfare benefits 5500s will have to jump in because I don’t have that. Sorry.

Well I’m confused because I’m not aware of many data points that would be identical on those two forms. The name, address and EIN ought to match of course. But can you list a few examples of data points that should match? Please be specific.

Amicable or not, you need legal counsel to ensure your requests are met.

Corey, it would just be 3% for the 2024 year if adopted by 12/1/24, right?

Perhaps some of our legal eagles will chime in because I am not one. You may be right and have a defensible position. I've always viewed a QNEC done to pass an ADP test as different than a QNEC used under SCP to fix a missed deferral opportunity (mdo). Perhaps there is no difference. And perhaps there is no difference in the % contribution for the mdo and the additional earnings needed to satisfy the EPCRS SCP requirements. But the second use of the QNEC and especially the earnings always seemed different to me; more like the penalty for a prohibited transaction. Now we live in a time where employers are facing fiduciary lawsuits merely for using forfeitures to reduce a normal employer contribution because that's not deemed in the best interest of the participants. Not sure I would want to defend using forfeitures for correcting an employer error much less for the cost of the time value of money.

Can’t use plan assets to pay employer penalties.

Correct. Updated info goes in 1 & 2 and old info in 4a and b.

This just doesn't seem rational to me. Whatever/whomever precipitated the death, the coroner/medical examiner is going to determine the cause during the autopsy. And no police dept is going to just throw up their hands and say we may never know. Was it natural causes or did she just lose her balance? Or was there foul play? Regardless of that, the ME is going to complete the death certificate with something more than pending. Weird vibes on this.

Do those "standardized" prototype documents even exist in the wild anymore? I haven't seen one in years.

Rollover first? Or RMD first? Because the RMD has to come out if the participant will reach RMD age during the Distribution Calendar Year.

Just make sure the earnings for the HCEs are prior year since that's how the status is determined.

Damn.

For 2024 RMDs, Roth is excluded.

No.

Paul was more specific, but a corrective amendment for that one person is what I meant because I thought that's what you had said.

Why? Because that’s the solution.

You're reading the instructions correctly for the line. But, it's the number on line 5c(1) that determines whether you need an audit or not.