Bill Presson

This is a good example of why we try really hard to not work with any platform providers and offer our own daily platform. We get to set the rules instead of living with others' rules. (self serving comment: we're also working with TPA's that don't like those kind of restrictions and are providing recordkeeping services for them) I wish you the best.

Does the plan allow for participants to make a separate election for bonuses? Does the plan allow for participant to change their deferral election at any time? Did the participants say anything whether or not in writing that indicated they did not want 401(k) amounts withheld. It's possible that some combination of the above will allow the plan to have actually been in compliance.

This is what we're planning as well.

Not if they meet the exception in the link I provided.

I think they should deduct the NHCE contribution on the correct Sch C because it would have an impact on SE taxes. But make sure you have a controlled group first. If there are no children under 21, it might not be. http://www.mhco.com/library/Articles/2010/...olG_022510.html

Any time within 12 months of the last one.

That's become a standard letter sent by EBSA. It is a suggestion, but not a requirement.

In 1990, I got prepared for my very first DOL investigation (audit). I had already been through several IRS audits for clients and had everything organized the exact way with the 2848 on top. When the DOL rep sat down, I handed him the 2848 and he asked what it was. I told him it was a POA and that was always the first thing I gave the IRS reps. He said, "We don't care about a POA. We're the Department of Labor and are conducting an investigation. We'll talk to whomever we want and if we don't get answers, we'll get a subpoena." I never worried about a POA for them again.

It's only problematic in that it will likely not be able to keep the policy in force for long.

We bill by the hour. A lot depends on the familiarity of the attorney drafting the DRO and whether they send it to us for review before getting it signed by a judge.

We've done this kind of thing before. And, inevitably, we start getting the requests "at the employee meeting just explain what a mutual fund is and what the types are, etc." We will not accept plans without an advisor anymore.

That's my interpretation.

There is nothing preventing you from having both plans in effect at the same time as long as you don't exceed the 415 limits.

I have no idea why you guys are even responding to this troll. A week ago he was 68.

I agree with you.

You can create a plan, but it would be a multiple employer plan instead of a single (controlled group) employer. I'm also ignoring any ASG issues as there's not enough info for that.

Like

Austin, we use Relius and contracted with them to get a Morningstar download that provides all that information.

They shouldn't be withheld because Division A doesn't have a plan during that period.

The loan policy says there is a $175 fee. Also, can you just have the participant write you a check and not deduct it from his account?

S Corp dividends are not earned income.

This is why you need to have a close relationship with an attorney, even possibly on retainer. There is no way you should make this decision without competent counsel.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the 7/1/12 date, but I'm willing to bet that most disclosures were distributed closer to 7/1 than 5/31. And I agree that I misspoke on "plan". I noted above that I meant to type contract.

Remember that 408(b)(2) isn't an annual mailing. Unless something changes for a client (and we know it will), no further disclosures are required. Now we might change our business model to do this annually, but I don't think the requirement is there.

That's why we prefer to answer things online. You can't see our confused looks!