Bill Presson

We have always used check date. So if a participant enters 4/1, they would complete the deferral election form and the amount would be deducted from the 4/2 check. If it's paid on 4/2, it's not March pay. Just like if it's paid on 1/2/13, it's not 2012 pay.

Most of the plans we handle are daily and we do the recordkeeping in house. So, our standard procedure is for the processor to determine if forfeitures are available and verify that forefeitures can be used for fees.

As with the others, I think you probably have some flexibility. But I wouldn't want to explain why I charged an RK fee to the participants and then reallocated forfeitures. It might not make any difference, but if the RK fee is allocated differently than the forfeitures, you would have some people paying more than they should have. If the fees are paid by the sponsor, then the whole question is irrelevant.

IRS letter does not disqualify them, but a DOL letter does. With that said, act quickly to file and then immediately respond to the IRS.

We've had very few plans want a Roth provision at all and those that do offer it, very few participants are using it. I've never seen it as a good option, so maybe that's influencing our clients. Also, I'm going to do my absolute best to prevent any of our plans from doing in plan conversions. That is a huge potential bucket of worms that I don't want any part of.

As MoJo said, the employer and the trustee are obligated to provide appropriate options. Now, it doesn't have to be employee directed, etc., but they can't just throw up their hands and give up. Looks like you're going to need to find a new provider. Your best bet will probably be to find a provider that will take them all so you can work with them at the same time.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not aware of a penalty for filing an amended return.

Rats. Well, the only ethical thing you can recommend is that they amend all the returns. Another option, as you mentioned, is to just add it to the most current filing and move forward. It's not like a return wasn't filed in prior years, it just wasn't as complete as it should have been. So the likely consequence on audit is to add the information and file the amended returns at that time. If they choose to not amend, you've made your recommendation and can then implement the clients wishes.

Wouldn't allow them to contribute to ALL the investment choices or just a fixed investment product? I think the answer to the problem is dramatically different depending on the answer to this question.

You likely have already asked and answered, but just want to make sure: Did they have 100 or more participants in the prepaid legal benefit for all of the years?

From the instructions: Part III – Accountant’s Opinion Line 3. The administrator of an employee benefit plan who files a Schedule H generally must engage an Independent Qualified Public Accountant (IQPA) pursuant to ERISA section 103(a)(3)(A) and 29 CFR 2520.103-1(b). This requirement also applies to a Form 5500 filed for a 103-12 IE and for a GIA (see 29 CFR 2520.103-12 and 29 CFR 2520.103-2). The IQPA’s report must be attached to the Form 5500 when a Schedule H is attached unless line 3d(1) or 3d(2) on the Schedule H is checked. Note. An IQPA Report generally consists of an Accountant’s Opinion, Financial Statements, Notes to the Financial Statements, and Supplemental Schedules.

At the ASPPA Benefits Conference of the South last May, Scott Albert (with the Chief Accountant's office of the DOL) said that he expected plans to file 5500's for 2011 since they had clarified in plenty of time for them to meet the 10/15 extended deadline. Now that's not official, but the 5500 is created in his office, so I think that holds some weight.

If the doctors are each in their own group, can the employer choose to not make a contribution for his group?

Make sure you know exactly how the purchase happened. Buying a business via a stock or entity purchase is very rare, especially in professional practices. Doing it that way causes the buying entity to take on existing liability and most don't want to do that. Now assuming that IS what happened, then the transition rules in 410(b) apply and the census of the purchased entity is ignored for the plan of Dental Practice A. That would include ADP/ACP. But if Dental Practice A just bought the assets, then the employees were likely just hired by A and will be treated like any other employee.

He can if the fee comes out of his account and doesn't reduce his RMD. The RMD is designed to impose taxes on the tax deferred accounts at some point in time. Reducing an RMD defeats that purpose.

I would use the schedule A they provided you and keep that form in the file.

The IRS typically doesn't even deal with cents. Are you sure there aren't some rounding options that would resolve the issue?

Always nice to find old threads on "new" topics. Just had a question from a potential client about this issue. I don't like the idea of a company being the trustee, but need to be able to tell him whether or not they can be. So, it appears that it is based on state law (assuming Peter is correct above and I have no reason to believe otherwise). I did have one client in Kentucky get approval from the Dept of Financial Institutions to do this, but they were working closely with their legal counsel, so I didn't think much about it. Plus it was 20+ years ago when I knew more than I know now! Any suggestions on how to determine whether a state will allow this? Or is it going to mean hiring an attorney in the state to help? Thanks.

It's the same for any plan required to file a 5500. The filing penalties can be extreme especially compared to the relative ease of filing a welfare 5500. As to your second question, we've filed 5500's for plans that include benefits with different policy years. I've never had it questioned by the IRS or DOL as long as we remain consistent.

Agreed.

I think this will actually increase the number of people eligible, though perhaps not participating, in a 401(k). Since, in the retirement world, full time is approximately 20 hours per week, this might indicate a move from two people working about 80 hours per week to three people working about 80 hours per week. Businesses that had been in the 80-95 employee range, might suddenly have 120+ and now have to get an audit. Yuck. I hate thinking about this.

Good question, but I'm afraid I don't know. We use Relius, but never used their web client product. We always just filed directly on the EFAST2 site.

No, they are not. Look at it like this: 1)Assets plus Liabilities = Capital. 2) Therefore, Capital = Assets minus Liabilities I don't think this math works!

The deadline is based on the local time zone where the plan is located. If it was filed a day late last year, you might be okay if you were using the Relius web client. I know that they got a special one day extension for their users.

Antsyness. Yay for new words!