Bill Presson

Grateful for Ms Ilene and Derrin to provide their analysis for us here.

Post enough on here and it's gonna happen. BTDT.

4% isn't the maximum. You can do 100% up to 6% and still satisfy the ADP/ACP requirements.

I think we need more details here. The entity is owned in a trust. What is the "earned income" that the person is receiving? w-2? I think that counts. If the LLC is taxed as an S corp, then the pass through on the k-1 aren't earned income for anyone at all. If its' taxed as a "partnership" (with a single owner making it a disregarded entity) then the trust is the receiver of the "compensation" but I'm not sure that counts as earned income for A.

A SIMPLE IRA is required to cover all members of a controlled group. A SEP generally is required to cover all members of a controlled group (there are exceptions) but it definitely has to be tested. My advice is that this isn't going to work. He's likely going to need a 401(k) for the controlled group.

Okay. We'll see what she says. If we don't like her answer, I'll reach out to Ms Heather and Ms Kelsey. 😀

But that was prior to the SECURE Act. I'm not sure that would be accurate anymore.

I've emailed her to ask.

BG, this is not a slam on you, but I find it impossible to believe they can't track down a w-2 anywhere. Payroll company? CPA? Nobody?

I didn't hear that or at least don't remember it specifically. But Derrin and Ms Ilene are pretty reputable. 😀

Just heard that our SD office has received a couple of these.

Ugh. So start a plan for 2020 and merge it into the current plan and become a participating employer. What one can do this way, one should be able to do the other way and save the client money.

Well, that's a very nice compliment, but let's don't get carried away here.

Since they are considered a single employer filer, I can't think of anything. If it was a multiple employer plan, then there would be. WCP

This an excellent description and looks like (with the right loan policy), I'm wrong.

So far, I appear to be in the minority here.

You can (and I think should) do this as well, but that number can't be used to file the 5500.

I definitely think you are wrong especially about aggregating the balances in two plans to determine the amount available from one plan. If a source is unavailable, i don't see how that is any different than trying to use unvested money as collateral.

It needs to be brought up to date. Whether that's a formal restatement or adopting the "termination package" that every document provider offers is dependent on the provider.

We are a little flexible in that regard. I personally think anyone that had a balance at any time in the year should get one, but I get push back from others that I'm being ridiculous.

I would be concerned about creating a precedent and standard. What if one were reviewed/warned but not the 99 others? Or 99 were reviewed/warned but not the 1 other?

It needs to be distributed to everyone with a balance whether or not still employed and to everyone eligible whether or not they have a balance.

Agree with Bird.

Excellent.