Bill Presson

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.

HA! I put what I originally thought it was and since I had previously claimed to know the answer, I didn't want to edit out that I had actually provided a wrong answer. I'll keep trying though!

Edited to add that I just realized you can actually type in the names in the spreadsheet to see if you're right. Duh. 4 & 13 listed above. I think I'm right on these. 3 Bridge over the River Kwai 8 Raiders of the Lost Ark (Indiana Jones) 10 The Untouchables 12 i was wrong on this one 18 Ghostbusters 20 i was wrong on this one 21 Speed

Tom, This only allows you to choose each source by fund. So if you have 3 sources and 15 funds, you have to do this 45 times, then try to add everything in the spreadsheet. I think that is what TPABob was trying to avoid.

Not if it's just deferrals and safe harbor contributions.

Ok. I'm pretty sure I know 3,4,8,10,13,18,20 & 21 (20 & 21 are educated guesses)

This basically what we had planned. And the participant is not yet asking for proof. Just trying to get my ducks in a row before responding. Thanks much.

Was the participant a VT before you took over as TPA? - If no, then you would have found (or not found) a distribution in the assets, thus confirming the current status. - If yes, then this sounds like a data question for the plan sponsor to answer. Just a guess. Yes, she was paid out before we took over. The sponsor is confident of the distribution as well, just no 1099 copy.

We have a plan that we've been TPA for about 10 years. Sometime in the distant past a participant (Y) terminated employment with a vested benefit and was reported as such on the SSA. Following that, we assume, she was paid out since there was no record of her on the information we received. It also appears that no additional notation was completed on another SSA indicating that she was paid out. We don't have a 1099 to show her. Any thoughts or suggestions on other avenues available to confirm the distribution? We're pretty sure it happened between 1997-1999. Thanks.

I think it says "allocation up to 415". I would really rather have the guys in different groups than deal with this.

We've gotten ours completed for everything that has to be done by February 1. We'll finish the 945's next week and the electronic filing (due in March) later. While it was a frustrating situation, I do appreciate the increased notifications on the status and the continuing work to get things resolved.

Agreed. I've registered my frustration with them. I'll be very interested in an explanation as to how this won't happen next year.

Might need a contact for that middle eye!

What about for 2010 if he had continuing receivables collection pay out?

I know this is a bit of a hijack, but what are your thoughts on what would be the real downfall of a TPA agreeing to serve in a fiduciary capacity? With the current legal environment, we're all already at risk anyway.