rcline46

Refuse the check. It will probably cost more than the check to do the work.

I have seen documents which state that the notice itself is an amendment to the document, so be careful on reading the document.

Find the final 415 Regulation amendment to the plan, that will answer your questions. If the plan has been restated for PPA, the answer is buried in the document under Compensation. Now if it were a 403(b) plan, and the document so provided (again - a document issue) then yes.

Equity partners form a committee to determine my income for the year. They give me guaranteed payments and a K-1 at year end. I am referred to as a partner. Does this really make me a partner to the extent of my pay as a ratio of total K-1"s, and if so, should the numbers (pay and ownership percentage) make me a KEY employee and thereby missing out on the Top Heavy Contribution? This could get interesting if I go in and out of KEY with my account sometimes in the calculation and sometimes ignored!

who said there are no participants?

Jim, today I would be super careful about saying ANY 403(b) is a non-ERISA plan since the DOL started making noise. How many investment providers? How much involvement by the employer (loans, hardships)? are any SEP contributions dependent on deferrals (like a match)? Oh, did I forget - what does the document say? Today I would think MOST 403(b) plans are ERISA plans.

Before assuming the test fails, request the test from the prior TPA for your records, and see why it just might have passed.

Do a search on 'next business day'. there are many threads on this topic.

I think you can rely on the written opinion of the hospital's ERISA attorney(s) that the docs are or are not employees. Even if wrong, you are shielded from any consequences. Make sure you put into writing that you are relying on such opinion.

Why bother? Have the person challenging you, even if in your company, provide the cite to back up their position.

I got a plan OUT of PBGC coverage when the son was issued an option to purchase 11% of the stock in the corp. It was a hassle because the front line person did not understand the law, but when it went to their manager, it was approved.

The old way - take lump sum, put into IRA, take partial payments from IRA. Keep It Simple Stupid.

What to do is described in the plan document.

What if 12/31 falls on Saturday or Sunday and your last day of work was Friday? What if your last day was 12/15 and you used up your vacation to the end of the year? Yes the Plan Administrator has to make the rules and stick with them.

Transfer of assets is common in a spin-off (trustee to trustee transfer). I know there is a bug-a-boo about separation from service and separation from employment (same desk rule re-visited), Why do you think the participants should have had options?

That is monthly, his pay muchly exceed the $200,000 level so 415 is not an issue.

Thanks all. The benefit went from 1879 to 5031, which seems reasonable to me considered the AE rate was 5.5%.

Ok, my brain is drawing a blank. Plan was frozen in 1990, person attained NRA (age 62) in 2003 and is still working. To do the AE increase, do I start at age 62 or do I start at age 65? Same question if we do a suspension of benefits. Thank you from the brain frozen.

While I agree the participant must get what looks like an annuity in a form provided by the plan, I disagree that no affirmative election counts as an election. The participant is being forced (required) to take a distribution they did not choose. When they choose to make an election, they can choose any form provided by the plan where someone who made a choice earlier usually cannot make another choice later.

Because your participant did NOT elect an annuity, he did not elect ANYTHING. He is being forced by the law to Required Minimum Distributions.

Did you read the document? Our DB document states that changes in compensation are recognized in the NEXT year. That means the $260,000 is NOT a factor and the accrued benefit is locked in as of 12/31/14 based on prior compensations. Again, read the document for when compensation can be used.

EPCRS describes in detail the methods that can be used to calculate lost earnings. It is up to you and your client to determine which method you will use. I use the attached signed by the client. Lost Earnings.doc

mphs77 - most documents require loans to be repaid or deemed distributed on termination, so even if B keeps its plan, the loans have to go. ETA - I would not have a problem with only allowing transferred loans in a plan, and no new loans permitted. Loans are not a protected benefit. Since no new loans are permitted, the bit about being available is a non-issue since no loans are available.

RMDs are required, not an option. Send a check with the 10%taxes deducted. Forget the package and signing now that you know her address, send the distribution, request copy of check after being cashed to see if it is her signature.

I can't be that old! Somewhere there was a rule that a restatement was required after 5 amendments, new SPD every 10 years, or 5 years if there were amendments. or maybe I've become 'ERISAfied', something akin to petrified?