Bill Presson

I submitted April 5th. Nothing yet. Oh well, the current doesn't expire until 9/30/23.

If he wasn't eligible, then he didn't have an MDO. Amend the plan just to allow the PS for him and nothing else.

If you could get them to publish this guidance, it would be appreciated.

The company is the plan sponsor even if the company is a sole proprietor. If it is a sole proprietor they are required to get an EIN if they haven't before. If one person owns both companies, then it's a single employer for retirement plan purposes and doesn't matter what the businesses do.

Thanks for precisely quoting my bad grammar.

I'm just trying to find a reasonable way to make it work. The TPA doesn't have to make the decision. The Employer does (absent 3(16)) as it falls on them.

FWIW, we used the C3 restatements to change all our plans to IRA rollover on force-outs just so we wouldn't have to deal with this anymore.

What about her purchasing his share of the home?

Agreed with above.

A 401(a) plan is just an employer sponsored retirement plan (eg profit sharing or money purchase). If never seen "thrift plan" used in conjunction with 401(a). That's usually reserved for when the staff are contributing. And, I usually hear 401(a) from non-profit people when they a have a 403(b) in place as well.

I've seen this occasionally when an owner/participant wants to take distributions on a regular basis. It's much easier and cheaper to get an IRA distribution than it is to get one from the plan (if done correctly). It's usually when the owner wants to continue making contributions as well, but also if there are illiquid assets in the plan.

The basic plan document may have info on how the payments are applied. Vesting is just one of the issues with the repayments. Distribution timing would also be affected.

Understood that whole list. Just assumed from the prior response, there were no heirs at all. Thanks.

So the "per stirpes" won't apply here? Shame.

I raised this issue the first time I heard that it was a possibility and I thought it was really stupid then. But it's a provision that "raises funds" so it had to be included to make the whole thing happen. I would expect guidance late this year and anticipate that it will be treated like an in-plan roth conversion. My hope is that we can "convert" just the recharacterized amount and leave any related earnings alone.

Your real mistake was assuming that an IRS form with a 11-2022 revision date would actually have updated dates in the form rather than dates from a decade ago.

Yes, I believe all plans will have to be amended to allow for Roth. But I don't understand why you would lose reliance by amending?

Agree with Bri, but also want to say there was likely an issue with the successor plan timing unless the original single ER plan was merged into the PEO. Where did that money go?

We've had clients use The Entrust Group, IRA Resources, Inc., and Equity Trust Company in various situations. Mostly same disclaimer as QDRO above.

Looks to me like it was just a distribution unless the owner is an IRA account.

No. What would justify the 1099? There was no distribution.

If the TPA is running the daily val platform, that would be the reason.

I must admit I've never seen that in 35+ years, so I stand corrected.

I think you think "pass them through" means that the participant can get the cash. That's not the case. It all stays in the plan.

Why couldn't it?