rcline46

For those record keepers. Tell them the AP will file an ERISA 501(?) suit against them for interference in their ERISA rights unless they (the record keeper)can show where 'their forms' are required by ERISA. I am sure you know an ERISA attorney who would do that pro-bono just for fun!

Just for fun, get the person who is suggesting that strategy from the insurance company to put the recommendation in writing and countersigned by his/her manager.

Which proves all documents are NOT created equal. Time to go back to the one who drafted the document for an explanation of both why deemed distribution is not in the document, and how to count these people on the 5500. Oh, and get it in writing so you can either: 1. defend having to get an audit, or 2. defend against an IRS or DoL inquiry on an incorrect 5500 participant count.

Now ask me how I REALLY feel!

permitted to use. Not required to use. Also it says add up the limits, so limit -0- for part of the year, limit $100 rest of year. Add them up get $100. On an annual basis. Catchup are by law/regulation determined ONLY at the end of the year, and by some incompetent payroll company interpretation. I see no problem amending now.

When does (permitted to average) become MUST average. I do not see a prohibition against locking it down now, just no refunds if one is now over the new limit.

1.401(a)(4)-11(g)

We use the lowest % on the vesting schedule.

How many investment providers do they have? Who rules on hardships and/or loans? The DOL published how to avoid being an ERISA plan back in 2009 I believe.

The IRS in the EPCRS recognizes the time to calculate their detailed answers and permits more streamlined versions. Then they take it way by saying the answers must be comparable to the detailed calculations. I cannot figure out how to prove the results are comparable without doing the long way. So I let the client choose (with cost estimates or my time). Most of them it is very clear that the cost of my time will almost always exceed the cost of the correction when a detailed calculation is done.

The method described comes with rules from the DOL - it must be done within 6 months of the failure, the plan participants must be notified of the failure, and I think those are the biggies - oh yeah, and you must file with the DOL using their forms.

That rule is in the PPA docs. If current doc is silent on what employer contributions the forfeitures can be used for, use them for the Safe Harbor.

One very primary rule - deferrals cannot be made before the document is signed, even if there is a retroactive effective date.

If you look at the code, it was modified several years ago from 80% to 50%. Then the pension only 80% was added back in a later sub-section.

Check to see if the plan in question is using elapsed time. That will require last day to get a year of service.

CG for accounting yes, CG for pensions no, ASG undetermined

What is missing here is the plan document. What does it say are the distribution options? The advisor needs that to even begin to answer the questions.

Austin - start with the rules for how a dc plan escapes the J&S rules. Pension plans (DB, MP, etc) cannot escape the rules. The rule I am focused on is that the spouse MUST be the 100% beneficiary UNLESS the spouse consents. If subject to J&S (and QPSA), then the spouse is only 50% bene, the other 50% can be directed as the participant directs. However, if NOT subject to the rules, the participant cannot say 50% to spouse and direct the rest else where without spousal consent.

What kind of plan, and is it subject to QPSA rules? If subject to QPSA, then he is probably correct (more info needed). If NOT subject to QPSA, then just naming spouse as 50% or more does NOT work.

ESOP Guy - I would not use the word 'combine'. It becomes a rollover account, and interesting enough - unrelated rollover for top heavy purposes, since it counts as an in-service from the distributing account. The document allows rollovers from IRAs and Qual Plans. There is also the option to create a segregated Alt Payee account (no distribution, no rollover). A little messy when the system runs on SSNs, but no 10% excise tax when it is taken out.

I remember when conduit IRAs only could be rolled into another plan, and so an IRA created with a QDRO rollover could not again be rolled into a qualified plan. At least I think I remember that. Now we have inherited IRA accounts and all kinds of new stuff. So my primary question is if there is a list of IRAs and where can the be rolled over (into) what? That would answer the question if a QDRO IRA can be rolled into another qualified plan. If that is so, then just maybe if both spouses work for the same company, can the spousal alternate payee roll the QDRO distribution directly into their account in the same plan? Thanks to those who find the answer.

Cynchbeast - is this and individually directed account, pooled account, self directed brokerage account? It seems we are making assumptions that may not apply to this plan. Are there other participants?

Major misunderstanding of how a loan works in a non-insurance plan. A loan is treated as a directed investment. Cash is removed from the plan, and an asset called a loan is created. In 2cents example, the balance after the loan is $150,000 in cash and $50,000 in a loan (a receivable). He could not then take an inservice of $170,000, only $150,000 (which is legal). If he had paid back $10,000 then he could take an inservice of an additional $10,000 (interest payments are ignored). Nothing is out of line here. It is different for many plans handled by insurance companies - think older 403(b) plans. Here the insurance company actually loans the money, and you pay back the insurance company (and they keep the interest). The Ins. company places al lien against your balance, but you keep all of your money invested. They will not let any funds be disbursed that would reduce the invested balance below the lien amount.

How does he get the stock options into his personal plan?

Actually, for those making over the pay limit, the per payroll option is just begging for an over contribution. Otherwise I agree with Austin3515.