Ron Snyder

Your choices are: 1) Trust strangers on a bulletin board who don't even use their own names, or 2) Obtain the services of a qualified professional (in this case an attorney) who is familiar with the various issues and programs available with respect to your situation. Take a wild guess which approach I favor.

I don't believe that IRS is limited to only one deadly sin.

Congress has used qualified retirement plans as its whipping boy since 1982, when Ronald Reagan submitted the "largest tax increase of all time" (to balance the 1981 Kemp-Roth bill that was the "largest tax reduction of all time"), the greatest source of projected tax revenues was from the changes to retirement plans. After spending many years doing qualified plans, I came to the conclusion that they don't really do clients a favor. Qualified plans don't generate tax savings, only tax deferrals. And the chance of our clients being in a lower tax bracket a few year from is very small. Company provided retirement benefits were to have been the second leg of the 3-legged stool (along with personal savings and social security). How are we doing on the other 2 legs? Social security is no longer solvent like it was at the end of the Clinton Administration (Congress actually believed that it had "solved" Social Security at the time until 2029, a ridiculous claim). Anything that makes employer-provided retirement benefits less desirable will put an inordinate amount of political pressure on Congress to expand Social Security as an ever-increasing number of retired Americans attempt to live on Social Security plus an insufficient amount of savings.

Our plan documents permit separate elections with respect to base compensation, commissions and bonuses. The salary deferral election form, therefore, provides for separate elections with respect to each type of compensation.

Scam? Farce? The rhetoric went beyond that which was required. It is apparent that those who oppose cross-tested plans do not fully understand them or the clients who adopt them and who will not be providing benefits to their employees if they are taken away.

The statement doesn't make sense from another perspective: frequently governmental units fund plans on a "pay as you go" basis, budgeting for their projected expenses each year. I wonder if the language was left over from the anti-Obama scare stuff. This is besides the obvious: such a provision would violate the "separation of powers" clause of the US Constitution.

What the agent is doing in acting as a third party administrator of the 125 plan may or may not be legal, depending on which state he is operating in and the documentation for the plan and the bank account from which the claims are paid. My guess is that he is violating state laws and could be put out of business by the state insurance department.

The good old days. Yes, the exclusion from income from accident and health plans applies to accident and health plans that provide dental and vision benefits.

Does the document permit the trustee to delegate the authority to you that you would be able with that authorization? Typical documents permit investment advisors to be able to trade on behalf of the plan, and permit TPAs to perform administrative functions. However, if you are being delegated authority over plan assets, you would likely be deemed to be a fiduciary. In your shoes, I would attempt to have the mutual fund group limit the access to only those activities you are being engaged for.

I received one for 1999 with no explanation.

Maybe we could all list our fee schedules, so that we can bring our fees into alignment with each other. Of course that would be collusion and price fixing, and illegal. Perhaps your consultant is now in the clink.

The fact that you are telling me that a tax opinion letter is "used in their marketing materials" is of considerable concern. As a tax professional, I believe that dissemination of a tax opinion to be used for promoting a transaction is a violation of the Circular 230 requirements and can subject the issuer to harsh sanctions. It is doubtful that KPMG wants to be subject to those penalties, and the abuse is likely the result of misguided sales people like yourself. BTW, the Exec-U-Care website lists Scot Wilkins as Executive Director and Larry Jurkens as Associate Director. No mention of Chuck Roeder.

Deleted due to posts on other thread.

Nothing about it on their webpage Benestar.

I think of Havlicek more as a shooting guard than a forward. He actually switched between 2 and 3 positions. The list of 13 is well-reasoned. I'm not sure that Bob Petit belongs on it; the problem is that there isn't much difference between the 11 and 12 and the next 30 greatest players of all time. Can we leave out the NBA all-time career leader in both assists and steals? (John Stockton) Preston's starting 5 are all wonderful players, but it seems to me that you can't start both Russell and Abdul-Jabbar at the same position. I love Oscar and Jerry, but ahead of MJ and Magic? Back in the days of the ABA Dr. J had moves that seemed humanly impossible. He was a solid pro in the NBA when he was older, but as a young man he was truly amazing. I also loved watching Pistol Pete do things nobody else has ever done (before or since). He scored 52 points one night, mostly from outside, before the NBA adopted the three-point shot. If fact it was argued at the time that Maravich was the reason the league waited so long to adopt the rule.

Of course, jims has hit on a potentially serious question. Question: What lender would loan to a trust that apparently doesn't have other assets (hence the reference to negative assets)? Answer: One that has a personal guarantee from someone with deep pockets and a good credit rating. Question: How can an individual provide a guarantee with respect to such a loan? Wouldn't such a guarantee be considered a "sale or exchange of property between the plan and a party in interest"? Answer: Absolutely. Of course my original response was flippant. Sorry if it wasn't obvious. There are procedures for reducing mortgages to the value of the property either with or without the lender's cooperation. Most lenders don't really want the real estate unless there is equity in it. The trustee should look around for an attorney who is familiar with the new real estate debt remedies.

Shot in the Dark: You are wrong. You clearly are too young to have seen year after year of Bill Russell against Wilt Chamberlain in the NBA games and championships. However, I am not. Russell's athleticism overcame Chamberlain's height advantage. While Wilt was on the court, they cancelled each other out. However, Russell stayed on the court longer because he fouled less. Of course Russell was in better shape because he didn't have sex with over 10,000 women. With Russell, the Celtics were NBA champions in 1957, '59, '60, '61, '62, '63, '64, '65, '66, '68, '69. Russell was the NBA MVP in 1958, '61, '62, '63, '65. Chamberlain was NBA champion in 1967 and '72) and was NBA MVP in 1960, '66, '67, '68. I am not a Celtics fan, but I know BS when I see it: "He isn't tall enough or physical enough to battle Kareem and Wilt."

Trustee serve at the will of settlors or trustors. They grant certain powers to the named trustee in the trust agreement. The power to appoint or designate someone else to wield trustee powers, or some trustee powers, must be set forth in the trust agreement. If it isn't there, the trustee cannot grant the POA.

Assess the participants the shortfall, and if they don't pay, kick them out of the plan! The facts you have recited make a prima facie case for a violation of the ERISA prudence requirements by the fiduciaries, and, ergo, the liability of the fiduciaries to make up the losses to the plan. The participants should sue. If you are working for the trustees, resign!

I recently researched transfers between welfare benefit plans and found over 100 private letter rulings dealing with (and generally approving) such transfers. The real question is whether you are taking benefits from one group and giving them to another (which could conceivably be deemed an impermissible reversion or prohibited inurement). However, if a group of employees who were covered under a VEBA have now organized, transfer of their benefits into a 501©(5) should be okay. If you review the PLRs, you are likely to conclude (as I have) that the proper course of action will be for them to obtain a PLR of their own prior to effecting the transfer.

Can a "summary" written in language calculated to be understood by a typical plan participant ever meet the requirements imposed on a plan document? I doubt it. I'm not even sure that requirements imposed by ERISA, COBRA HIPAA, etc. can be summarized in layman's language. The plan document exists for several purposes: 1. To set forth the provisions of the plan in detail; 2. To be executed; 3. To enumerate and implement the legal requirements applicable to the plan; 4. To serve as a reference source to clarify issues that are not detailed in the SPD. A reasonable length for an SPD is 10-15 pages. A normal length for a plan document is 60-100 pages. Finally, why is it that this question is posed over and over by lazy or cheap health practitioners? Never once has a pension person come on the Board and asked whether the SPD can be used for a plan document. The health people want the summary issued by the insurance company to be the "plan" when in fact, it doesn't even meet the DOL requirements for an SPD.

Here are a couple of answers: a) Yes, under the check the box rules. b) Yes, just like any C corporation. However, if they elect to be taxed as an S corporation, they will not be able to enjoy MERP benefits, as those will be passed through to the 2% owner.

I don't know of any TPAs that trade through TD Ameritrade. Many use the Fidelity trading platform or John Hancock. TD Ameritrade is not a robust trading platform and has several deficiencies (bond trading, limited numbers of mutual funds and ETFs). I suggest that you contact Relius and ask for their user list for your area, and then contact them to find out which trading platform(s) they utilize.

You may not have a PT at all. You may either have a disqualifying event or an excess loan taxable under IRC section 72(p).

I have switched to the Google Chrome browser, although I still use Firefox occasionally. Chrome is faster and very reliable. Firefox wants me to download the update but until now I have not done so.