Bill Presson

You can find all of them here: http://www.irs.gov/irm/part25/irm_25-006-001r.html

This was fun! Stumbled across while looking for something else.

Always ask for the other person to provide a cite in support of their position.

Most people I rely on to help me interpret these kinds of things felt it eliminated all individual coverage through a cafeteria plan. http://www.groom.com/media/publication/1304_Individual_Health_Policies.pdf

I know I read the Technical Release 2013-03 last fall as eliminating that option.

Just so everyone knows, this isn't the CPA firm I work for.

I assume not everyone is terminated, especially the owner. If you 'allocate' a match to the owner alone, you would fail 410(b) and could do an -11(g). But I don't think a failure is even required, so I don't have an issue with an -11(g) amendment.

Pretty sure it depends on who the beneficiary of the trust is.

We work with a ton of medical practices. The standard for almost all of them is to hire as of July 1, even when the doctor shows up in the office a bit later. That's because June 30 is almost always the date the residencies or fellowships are dated to end. Not sure that's the case here, but I'm betting it is. If his employment contract says July 1 is his hire date, then that's his hire date.

If he really wants to push the issue, I would have the employer run a special payroll in December 2013 and make the necessary corrections. The deferrals that are in the plan, I would forfeit and use them for future employer contributions. I wouldn't take the money back out of the plan. But it's hard to believe he's really that upset if he let several payrolls go by.

What is the real risk if the IRS or DOL question it? I'm not in favor of filing incorrect 5500s, but it it's not material, I would likely look at letting it lie.

Yes.

We had a plan once that fell below 100... but the sponsor actually wanted the plan audit, since it was "independent" and gave him some comfort that someone else was looking at the plan... even with the cost involved. We had that once as well. We still filed as a small plan, but the sponsor paid for the audit and just kept it in the desk. After 3 years of paying for an audit that wasn't required, we convinced them to save the money.

I bet JEC and FRAPlantools are the same person! What an excellent plan! 1. Make a single post on a message board. 2. Wait 13 years. 3. Answer self.

There are two things that have gotten confused since the grace period came about 6-7 years ago. Prior to that time there was a "run out" period. It was a time that allowed participants to submit reimbursement requests for expenses incurred during the earlier plan year. Sometimes it was only 30 days, but could be as long as 75 days. So for a 2012 calendar year plan, participants could submit claims until March 15, 2013. The claims had to be for expenses incurred during 2012. Then the grace period was introduced. Unfortunately the time frames for both items were often exactly the same. It was possible to add an additional time frame for an additional run out period after the grace period, but no adminstrator wanted to keep the books open that long. So a grace period (and this DOES have to be in the plan document) allows a participant to make an election for 2012 and use that money for expenses incurred from January 1, 2012 until March 15, 2013. So, the key issue is often making sure an expense in January 2013 is reimbursed from the proper account. It SHOULD be paid from any 2012 money remaining, but sometimes the accounting isn't done correctly. This is very possibly what has happened. I'm sure it is also some confusion between grace period and run out period. Hopefully, this gives you enough to go back and work through the plan years and reach the correct amount. Under no circumstances should you have amounts still sitting in prior years accounts. It should be forfeited and retained by the employer. But make sure you've accounted correctly.

We use Sharefile. Occasionally we get the calls you mention, but it gets more and more rare the longer the client is with us.

So I'm not the only one that thought this was weird! Good. I couldn't recall ever seeing or hearing about this form in 30 years of working in the retirement field. I feel a little better. If I think of doing this, I might. Otherwise, I'm not losing sleep over it.

Don't confuse initial entry with the ability to change an election. They are two different things and should be covered separately in the document.

I've asked one of the guys in our office how he learned. It was mostly self taught/trial & error, but maybe he'll have some suggestions. I do know it was mostly a report modification process like what Tom mentioned. Unfortunately, the books don't have information on the Relius tables and that's the key to learn.

We've done it this way numerous times.

If I see anything in print, I'll let you know. So far it's all been hearsay.

The biggest issue for our plans is the grace period exception. So now we're having to spend a lot of time explaining to participants why we really don't recommend doing this for 2013; too many participants might have planned for the grace period to use the rest of their money. Then we'll have to decide what to do for 2014. Also hearing about a potential legal challenge that the IRS has unilaterally created deferred compensation where they weren't allowed. For anyone making this change for 2013, how are the software changes getting done?

I haven't seen anything indicating an change in filing requirements.

Here's the notice. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-13-71.pdf Why can't the Service issue anything without complicating other things? Participants can now roll over up to $500 to a new year, but the exceptions and restrictions make it almost useless.

That's the way we see it as well. Our legal counsel confirmed and a webinar by Ft William last week said the same thing.