Bill Presson

Banks create money when they loan. They aren't loaning their own money or their customers money. But they do have regulatory capital requirements that they have to meet if their loan balances grow.

That's almost a direct quote from what I say. But some are still convinced it will mean more work. Not many, but a few.

I tell clients this all the time and some refuse to believe me.

We file it with the parent company as the employer. Then on lines 11 & 12 we list each QSLOB. Your client will be one QSLOB and the new entity will be another. They both have to qualify.

It's so tiring telling people that we could have provided options if they had only consulted us prior to the transaction. The M&A attorneys should be sued for malpractice.

Well, I left off a long part of what I had in my head: ", but often the bonuses are in excess of the maximum compensation limit." (edited to add after comma since I forgot to include)

Also, might want to do a preliminary 414(s) test and make sure the client will actually be allowed to exclude the bonuses. Typically bonuses are paid to the HCEs more frequently and in higher amounts than to NHCEs ", but often the bonuses are in excess of the maximum compensation limit." (edited to add after comma since I forgot to include) I've never heard a good rationale for a company to exclude bonuses and about as rarely seen them able to do so.

Who are you asking?

Agree with Belgarath as well.

Since our firm does do actuarial work, I say we are "actuarial and benefit consultants". As a description, I say "we do everything that needs to be done for a retirement plan except handle the investments." That usually gets things started.

Yep. Don't let them off easy. Charge what you would have charged.

I recommend contacting Ms Kirsten Curry, the owner of Leading Retirement Solutions. She has her JD and they've done a lot of work in this area. https://www.leadingretirement.com/solutions/cannabis-401k-plan

I would correct the things for the period you were hired to work on. And give them a letter advising them of the issues and your concerns. Since you haven't reviewed the prior years, you don't really "know" there's an issue. Our engagement says we're under no obligation to audit or review prior years. If they want to fix it, they can hire you to do so. If not, it's not on you. Don't make their problem your problem.

And then hire a professional TPA to do all your 401(k) compliance work.

Well, there is that.

Why would someone use Roth money in a plan to pay life insurance premiums?

Most flexible benefit (or cafeteria) plans have "cash-in-lieu" options which it appears you've elected. That means that you technically elected cash rather than a healthcare plan. Their plan also appears to then require that "cash" to be contributed to the 401(k). So, that's how they're handling it. Since 401(k) contributions don't enjoy the exact same tax benefits as a cafeteria plan, running it through payroll ensures the appropriate taxes are paid (ie FICA).

Agreed.

We call them consultants instead of administrator to avoid the confusion over the official PA. And, generally, (but not in stone) a person is eligible to be a Senior Consultant with 10 years experience. Doesn't have to all be with our firm.

Just be careful with this because the employer has to monitor EACH employee separately and ensure they know when they hit 1000 hours. The larger the number of employees, the harder that is.

Generally those things are covered in the representations and warranties in the acquisition agreement. In almost all cases, the transaction will be asset based and the prior owners will retain all lingering liability. Often the sellers will obtain some kind of tail coverage (much like a physician) to cover ongoing liability. The acquiring firm will have 0 liability assuming they have a decent attorney. ETA: if it's still a client, TPA #3 will probably have some responsibility to repair the issue, but any excess fines/legal costs generally is deducted from the payout to the sellers.

Why would you have any responsibility to a client that has been gone for 10 years?

100% to 15% match?? Nice.

I think this is kinda what we were hoping for. https://www.asppa-net.org/news/irs-issues-guidance-mid-year-amendments-certain-safe-harbor-plans?utm_source=MagnetMail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=bpresson@egps.com&utm_content=COM_APPA_eNews_06.29.2020_MON&utm_campaign=BREAKING NEWS%3A IRS Issues Guidance on Mid-Year Amendments to Certain Safe Harbor Plans

Agree with the others. But I'm also betting y'all have already provided the items above.