thepensionmaven

Apparently was not filed at all. I suggested filing under DFVC and paying the $750. Client must have received previous notices and ignored them. Are you saying that would not solve the issue? The accountant is the brother of the client.

CP 283, just a bill with a tear off payment slip

I was thinking about that. Can we do that at this time, especially after a $15K IRS fine? I assume the client should file under DVFC, pay the $750 and then send a copy of the filing to IRS at the address on the invoice? That should be satisfactory with IRS?? TX.

Form 5500-SF for 2013 was prepared for a client and filed late by about 2 weeks. Apparently client has received more than 1 Notice from IRS as he just emailed an IRS bill for $15,000. What is recommended here?

This is not a 401(k) plan, just a plain, straightforward profit sharing plan, one participant.

So I assume Box 1 is correct?

Employer maintains a profit sharing plan, no employees. Box 1 of his W-2 includes health insurance premiums; boxes 3 & 5 do not. Employer wants max deduction (and who doesn't?) Would his 25% be based on Box 1 or Box 3? Accountant seems to think Box 3.

We have a participant in one of our 401K plans that is requesting a hardship withdrawal that does meet the safe harbor criteria, but he has an outstanding loan. Does this preclude him from a hardship distribution, since the current loan has not been repaid?

Apparently the payroll people did not cut him off at $18,000 in the calendar year so the excess must be refunded?

Am inclined to agree with QP_Guy.

Actually, finally, per accountant, ADP did not cap him at the $18K so he contriubted too much in 2017, elective contribution, so there is no way to credit excess to 2018 Therefore, he gets a 1099R for excess contribution as well as earnings on excess, problem solved. Thanks all.

Fund-holder notified client he over-shot his $18 due to the fact the payroll company did not cut off his payments at $18 for the year. They refuse to do the excess earnings calculations. Is it out of the realm of possibility to use the VFCP Calculator for this purpose?

Actually, the accountant informed just now that she was referring to the elective deferral of the principal, shareholder of PC. Apparently he contributed more than $18K during the year, the difference is the balance of the 2017 contribution, which was made Jan-March 2017. Apparently the payroll company did not catch this. I don't believe there is any way around a 1099R; but I believe if he were a sole prop, he could have until the due date of his tax return.

We were just notified by a brokerage firm that our client, sole shareholder of his PC apparently over contributed to the employee portion of the plan. When reviewing the contribution history from 1/1/2017 - 12/31/2017, it would appear as though the balance of his elective contribution was for the prior year. He is not eligible to make catch-ups. I know that sole proprietors have until the due date of the business tax return including extension to contribute to the plan, including any employe contributions, but I do not think that applies to shareholders?

We've got a SP dentist who sponsors a SHM 401K, he contributed for 2017 as well as 2018 in 2018 toward the employer match. Of course the fund-holder directed the funds to the proper participant accounts. Now that the employer has learned he contributed too much, he wants to either have the excess removed and a check cut back to him or to have the funds transferred to his own account. We explained no-can-do, the money has already been deposited into the participants accounts and you can't remove it by claiming it was a contribution made in error. As far as removing and re-depositing into his own account, we cited 401(a)(4) benefits, rights and features. He wants to know why he can't contribute to his account now and to the employees' either later in the year, or by tax filing deadline for 2018. Need a cite, please.

Account treats two companies as totally separate entities. The companies in addition to sharing the same 6 digit SIC code and both essentially are in the carting/waste removal business. 1 co owned 50/50 by husband and wife Co 2 owned 50/50 by their two sons, over 21 years of age. The two sons, in addition, work for co 1. In addition, there is one shared employee. We have been treating the plans as a controlled group/ASG and combining the two for (a)(4) as both plans are New comparability PSPs. CPA does not agree. Is there a specific example in the regs I can show this guy?

Terms of plan are age 21 with 1,000 hours. Period. Seems like coverage has been passed?

A 100% owner of the business has a 401K with less than $250K in assets. She also has an employee that does not work and has never worked over 1,000 hours. Under plan characteristics code, there is an item 3(e) - one participant plan that passes minimum coverage, which seems to apply here. Payroll company seems to think Form 5500-EZ must be filed.

That is the conclusion I arrived at, just double checking, to be sure we don't run into problems down the road by excluding the employee. Thanks, Larry.

Plan effective 1/1/2009, established as a SHNE 401K. I bad, I just looked in the file, we amended the plan 1/1/2015 to eliminate SH and go with a straight 401K, employee with employer 100% match of the 1st 3% of W-2. The owner and wife are not contributing, all rank and file are contributing, the is obviously TH, but the participants are receiving 3% anyway. I don't see a problem under this scenario.

I meant TH because if the plan is not a SH, don't we have to give the TH 3% to all eligibles,ie those not contributing???

I had always thought this was NOT a controlled group, but indeed shared employees, as you say. One of those online answer groups mentioned shared employees, and I had been pointed to RR 67-101 My question is, if she works for the dentist who has severed his relationship with the others a few years ago and moved his office to another location, as well as working for one of the other dentists, is she no longer considered a shared employee and can be excluded from the plan of the dentist who broke all ties with the others. I believe so, but I am not sure.

He highly compensated employee is the owner of the company, who is not contributing. Other than taking the plan out of SH status, I don't see a problem. From what I have seen, taking the plan out of SH status mreans that the plan is determined to be a tested plan, subject to ADP/ACP testing; why would the ADP/ACP fail id no HCEs were contributing, they would be treated as 0% deferrals. Am I missing something here?

probably over the threshold, but if he is not contributing to the plan, why would it matter??

The only employee who is key employee as well as 1% as well as 5% owner is NOT participating.