rcline46

I would think the W-2 comes from the three party organization, not your client. Also, 'a few days a week' could easily amount to 1,000 hours in a year, so be careful there. Although I would agree on the ASG, I athink you need a legal opinion to cover each of the three doctors so that the individual liability is clearly established. just like you did for the shared employees. I would consdider putting a comparable plan into the billing organization equally funded to keep it all fair.

The answer is, he is counted as KEY in 2015 and based on the OP notes, the plan is Top Heavy as of 12/31/2015 determination date and therefore a TH contribution is due in 2016. Which is mean, because the former KEY caused it, and now gets the TH 2016 contribution.

S-Corp pays on a W-2, and so the deferral must come out of the paycheck. Why is there any delay in depositing?

Note that a Participating Employer includes an Affiliated Employer. So Article 11.7 tells you what to do. If there is no successor plan, then the Trustee (of this plan) shall retain the assets. Since the participants have not severed employment there is no distributable event. It just sits.

I would think that if they put a 403(b) into the non-profit, and a 401(k) into the for profit there would not be any concerns even if the are a CG. And I think they are a CG.

This should be covered in the plan document. In the Corbel document there is a substantial wirte up.

I would handle it exactly the same way you would handle a deposit into the wrong persons 401(k) account in the plan you handle.

The 'problem' with elapsed time is that the basis is an employment year. It is my opinion that if said person completed their 12 months on January 2nd (calendar year plan) then they earned an accrual year for that plan year and would be due a contribution. I would consider this a bad plan design. It is ok if you do vesting on elapsed time, but not accrual. (IMNSHO) Then add in service spanning rules and if the person is NOT gone at least 12 months then there is no break. It will get messy too quickly as Mr. Leggette is finding out (for accruals).

Without digging in, I would think one RMD, payable from any account as participant elects.

It is so because Big Daddy (the IRS) says so. No other reason is necessary.

Yep, been there, done that for a client. IRS audit did not complain.

Way too complicated, and if it only applies to HCEs, discriminatory and not allowed. If no HCEs, then there has to be a better way.

You get what you pay for. Of course you can, but are you willing to pay what said person would want?

Not so, but assuming the new rules stick, multiple advisors will be 'sticky' for the plan sponsor.

A self directed DB plan - not a good idea. You can give market rate earnings in a CB plan, but considering the minimums required, floors on the hypothetical account balances and such stuff, not a good idea even if legal.

I may be old and crochetty, but Bird's argument was on 'employer maintaining the plan' which in this instance is no longer operative. The plan terminated, so even if the employer was still working, the employer is no longer maintaining the plan. So how does the cited regulation apply when there is no longer a plan? Actually, I think there is no authority from the law, regulations, or IRS on this particular point, and so one is left to their own devices or interpretations. TIme to call in Gandalf the Grey.

If the IRS finds it, they would consider the tax return fraudulent. Not a nice situation. I don't know of any fix.

watch for 410(b) groups with each plan since it is considered 1 employer, HCEs are determined over entire group, not by each employer, people contributing in more than one plan.. That is all I got right now.

Two years?!?!?! B.S. Get a signed form and start now. If individual direction, quarterly statements are required, if not then annual.statements. Complaint for 2014 or 2015 is too late.

Deadline is 7 months from 12/31, so is 7/31/2016 for the short year. 6/15 would be for the 8/31/2015 year end.

My last face to face with the DOL they sent two people and they tried a 'good cop, bad cop' routine. They tried every trick in the book to get me to say something wrong. The 'bad cop' ended up terribly frustrated. So yes, get an attorney. This is an investigation and not an audit.

I would interpret 'suspend' in the normal way, that deferrals would restart automatically at the end of 6 months. as Jim Chad said - "ouch"

Are you saying that when you test all 45 together the test passes? If so stop, do not go to other wise excludable testing. If you are saying that the 'normal' test only passes by using the OEE, then do the give back to the HCEs in the OEE test. HCEs by code cannot be OEE, but the regulations permit it, so which works best is what you use.

Use equivalencies if you must. Elapsed time has some surprises that may be difficult for most systems to handle.

Yes