Bill Presson

This is a good example of why brokerage firms should never process distributions.

There are financial penalties for not issuing/filing the 1099r. Filing two would also be an issue, so make sure to coordinate that. Maybe get something in writing.

1. If your firm has been engaged to prepare 1099s, then you should do so. 2. Even if a 1099 isn't prepared, the participant is responsible for reporting taxable income on their own 1040.

I love how payroll incompetence or software limitations become retirement plan problems. I would recommend getting a new person to run the payroll or getting a new payroll company.

The only one I saw that I don't think was projected was the SIMPLE increase from $12,500 to $13,000

Agree with the others that you can't retroactively terminate the plan. It's a good thing that it was an asset sale. And I agree with both of Bird's answers. Ms Claire Rowland of Nixon Peabody and I just gave a presentation on M&A issues at ASPPA Annual.

Yes.

You're looking for "statutory employee." https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/statutory-employees

Depends on what the consultant is doing. If they're doing everything related to the plan, the 120 might be too much. If there's a distribution department and a plan document department and sales support/onboarding department and notice department an actuarial department, etc., then that carves out a lot of time that the consultant might have been spending on things irrelevant to their job. Then 120 isn't nearly as big a deal. And I would argue that having a consultant all the extraneous things I included isn't the best use of their time.

I would default to what the insurer calls it. FWIW, I've seen most insurance companies call it a stable value fund.

You said it was irrelevant as to why, but it may be very relevant. Companies don't just "change" EINs. So, if a new company was formed or the company was sold or whatever, you need to make sure the new company is actually legally sponsoring the plan.

Whatever you do, don't make the client's problem, your problem. Help them solve their problem and lay out the solutions. Big problems come with big price tags. It's not your fault the client didn't do what they should have done over the years.

Deferrals withheld from w-2 wages are subject to the 7 day safe harbor deposit rules and the ultimate "as soon as administratively feasible, etc" rules. So a payroll on 12/31 should be deposited within 7 business days to be confident of timeliness.

Entirely depends on the definition in the plan document.

Generally the Plan Administrator has the right to name a Trustee, including a successor Trustee, regardless of whether the former Trustee agrees. Assuming that provision is in the document, why would a current resolution/amendment saying that not suffice?

No. The repaid loan creates an after-tax basis in the plan when the distribution is ultimately made. https://www.napa-net.org/news/technical-competence/case-of-the-week-repayment-of-defaulted-plan-loan-after-deemed-distribution/

I worked at a large CPA firm for 12+ years. Having clients deduct contributions on a cash basis wasn't unusual.

I'm really confused about the discussion of including prior service. It's the same company. The guy didn't sell his company, he sold the assets of the company and changed the name. It's the same EIN.

I'm just happy this thread was resurrected since I missed it the first time!

Mike, go back and read your posts and the response. You specifically said "as an aside..." and then discussed 1000 hour and year end requirements for PS contributions. That's what K2 quoted and responded to. When you said "huh", I clarified.

We've always used the pay date. The 7 day safe harbor says if you get it in by then, no harm. Since it wasn't deposited by then, I think the loss date is the date it would have been on their paycheck, but for the election. I think this is similar to the 5500 late filing penalty. You've got till 10/15, but if you don't file by then, the penalty starts at 7/31, not 10/15.

There is no predecessor employer. It's the same employer.

Mike, just because everyone is in their own group, it doesn't mean they aren't also using allocation requirements for the PS contribution. K2retire is just saying that the OP might not have gotten the PS because he wasn't employed at year end and that might be a plan design, not an employer decision.

Create and sign the plan currently, with the current sponsor name and EIN, but make the effective date 1/1/18. No reason to have a short year or name change or anything. It's the same company.

" Your LTD benefits are reduced by other sources of income that are payable to you because of your total disability." I don't think any of the QDRO money is being paid "because of your total disability", is it?