Bill Presson

Agreed

The smart ones do. I had malpractice coverage when I owned my own TPA from 1986-1998 and our trust company that I merged into did as well. Haven't been an owner since the mid 2000's but I'm pretty sure the firms I've worked with since then have the coverage as well.

IRS announced they fixed the "glitch" (shades of Office Space) and will allow clients to ignore any late filing letter dated before 9/1. IRS Clarifies 8955 notices

Had a similar situation with a client back when I was in Lexington, KY. They ended up seeking approval from the State Dept of Financial Institutions to have their medical practice operate as a trust company only for their retirement plan and got approval. So the PC became the trustee for all the accounts.

Luke, the internet hasn't made things easier, it's just allowed for more things to be piled on.

I remember calling banks back in the late 80's/early 90's. They got very annoyed with the calls after the first 10-12.

If it was filed timely, an extension to 10/16/23 could be requested for a calendar year 2022 plan.

So the plan was terminated 10/17/2022. When were the assets distributed? If not until 2023, then the 2022 year is still a full year. But that would still mean 7/31/2023 would be the deadline for filing the extension.

And amend to everyone in their own group going forward.

Lou, Op's situation is a little different from this. Your client is paying cash unless the participant chooses to defer. The OP's client is making a PS contribution unless the participant chooses cash. Still can be done and I've had a handful of plans that did the latter over the years, but it's not very common.

Frankly, it doesn't matter if any of us are concerned or not. It's all a lottery (and I kinda mean the short story version). We had a 5558 for calendar year 2021 that was filed timely and received by the service in Ogden before July 31, 2022 (certified mail return receipt signed and dated). The IRS sent a CP216H rejection to our client dated July 31, 2023. Not the only silly thing to happen in the past 12 months with 5558s. Thank goodness electronic filing is just around the corner.

The transaction you described is basically what needs to happen. What I would recommend is that the insurance guy contact his home office’s advanced consulting office and get the exact instructions on what to do. If he refuses, tell the client to hire an ERISA attorney. Lots of possible liability sitting here. wcp

I assume you're putting the old EIN in question 4 of the 5500 ez? That would tie to the 5558 anyway. I would do that and wait for a letter. We have to deal with rejected 5558s for no good reason anyway.

Vesting is based upon a 500 hour year for those people forever even if they actually become eligible under the regular requirements

Time for the fiduciaries to negotiate a reduction in the revenue sharing.

They may have a right of first refusal of the stock (especially for the stock in B) or options both of which might create a controlled group.

Depends on whether you’re reporting on a cash or accrual basis.

Staying within the incidental limits is key. People often think you can use the "aged" money and just avoid the incidental limits, but that's just treated like an in-service withdrawal. Likely better to look at transferring the policy out of the plan.

They can file what they filed the previous year or file what is required for the current year. And any plan can voluntarily hire a CPA firm to do an audit whenever they like.

Assuming OP is accurate, what a stupid document.

You should follow what the document says. Likely the forfeitures should have been used in previous years, but can't roll back the clock. So eligible employees likely getting a little bump.

EOB is (or can be) web based as well. We use both.

I'll jump in the deep end: when it is at 99 on the first day of the plan year. But most wouldn't file as a small plan that year if the likelihood is it would be back to a large filer within a year or two. The 80-120 rule is to help avoid audit whiplash.

Agree with MoJo. The only exception might be if they could qualify for QSLOB treatment, but that requires 50+ ees in each and other very stringent items.

Thanks David. Please jump in more often.