Bill Presson

We've had this issue. The client ended up telling the investment advisor to make out a check to the Trustee for the entire account and put the money with a different investment advisor

If the deferrals are to two different plans, which ER is responsible for the 1099? There isn't a 1099, my bad. Tom explains the tax consequences on the individual and thus the double taxation.

It's my recollection that your mention of the other distributable event is correct. The other negative is that they still have to get a 1099 for the excess even though they don't get the money. So now those dollars will be taxed twice.

Well, apparently actuaries thought it was a big enough deal to work to convince the DOL that they don't have to sign the SB or MB, only initial.

We had an issue initially in January, but contacted Relius support, they determined the issue (it was on their end) and fixed it quickly. We still aren't having clients use it yet, but have tested it several times without issue since January.

Otherwise I agree with vebaguru.

Jack Buck & the Cardinals were definitely my favorite. But Detroit and Ernie were my favorite in the American League. Loved listening to both of them at night on the radio.

We've filed two of the directly while waiting on everyone else to test Relius Web Client for us. I agree that it's pretty ridiculous. Not sure I would post anything about the credentials.

Really. I can't even make a joke anymore?

If a document falls into a shredder and no one is there to see it, does it make a noise?

The most recent information I got is that the printing patch was delayed to 5/2.

I've seen lots of plans that have 1% as a minimum. Any issue with that? What about limiting the elections to only whole percentages? Just trying to see where you draw the line, Mr. Preston.

We haven't started processing any 5500's yet. I've told my clients that they shouldn't expect to hear from us until the end of May.

Your answer was more right than wrong, especially as it applies to what actually happened and can happen for 2009. It was also right for the incorporation question. So, I think "sorry" might have been enough, but "terribly sorry" was too much.

As long as an expense is not a settlor expense, the plan can pay it. An audit is an acceptable expense because it is part of ongoing requirements for the administration of the plan.

This is from the IRS site: Can catch-up contributions be made to a SEP? No. SEPs are funded by employer contributions only. However, catch-up contributions can be made to the IRAs that hold the SEP contributions if the SEP-IRA documents allow. The catch-up IRA contribution amount (for employees age 50 and older) is $1,000 for 2006 and later years. Here's the link: http://www.irs.gov/retirement/article/0,,id=111419,00.html

Bird, that was actually quite good.

Whether you call it a restatement or not, the plan has to be up to date with all provisions at the time of termination/distribution.

It doesn't since the Schedule P went away.

Agreed.

We had conversations with them. I don't really blame the DOL. I blame the silly client that held the return for six months.

We had a similar experience to Tom. Had a client terminate their plan and we provided their 5500 last summer. They waited until the end of December to file. Since the DOL received it AFTER December 31, 2009, we had to file electronically. Since our system isn't completely set up yet (and we hadn't planned on using it till sometime in April or May), we had to use the standard EFAST2 system. Wasn't horrible, but got to spend some extra time that we'll never fully recover.

I use it all the time and have used it for years. It doesn't clear 100% of what I would like, but probably 95%. And, as you mentioned, it is free. I've donated some in support over the years. I highly recommend it.

Nicely done, Tom!

It will be code 8. The only difference if it is paid after March 15th is that the employer will owe a 10% penalty with a form 5330.