k man

client is a law firm where each partner has his own PA which also adopts the plan. in the past (before we were hired) the sponsor allowed each PA to fund their PS contributions during the year but the corp funded the contribution for the law firm at the end of the year. the IRS is auditing the plan and they are requesting support for this position... to me it sounds discrminatory as well but if anyone thinks it is ok and knows of some legal basis, please post. thanks.

there are brokerage statements and three years of 5500s were filed.

no corporate resolution on file. i had thought about that myself. in this situation believe it or not the corp is out of business but i need to clean other things up with the plan so it seems it would be best to go into vcp with it.

the initial and only plan document was never executed. what is the proper correction method. one of the trustees is now deceased.

plan sponsor wants to reverse a land deal by buying the land from the plan. he claims to have put the land in the plan erroneously. put aside the absurdity of his story for a second... it would be clearly be a PT for him to purchase the property from the plan but is there a way to apply to the labor department in order to get them to bless the transaction.

that is not my understanding of what he means.

here the business owner is over 70 1/2 but i think your explanation is still correct.

i know he cant do it but i have to give them an explanation. the best i can come up with is that ERISA provides that participants must either be employees or former employees and that a trust cant be a participant because it is not an employee. only an actual person can be either an employee or a participant. does anyone have anything better??

can an employer beyond 70 1/2 continue to make SEP contributions?

Can a simple IRA participant roll their account to a 401(k) plan. i read in cch that simple distributions can not be rolled to other qualified plans but EGTRRA IRA's can be rolled to qualified plans. does that include simple distributions?

are they included in total compensation even though they do not appear on the employee's W2? i assume since it is not on the w2 you dont use it but do you use it for testing purposes?

if an employee receives both a W2 and a 1099 from their employer, what definition of compensation (W2, 415 or 3401) would the plan need to use in order to use both numbers for profit sharing contribution purposes.

it depends what type of document you use. if it is a prototype, chances are you could just file a one page amendment selecting the safe harbor choice. i dont see why it would be necessary to restate the doc in its entirety.

client has a MP and a PS that have not been amended for GUST or EGTRRA. they want to get rid of the MP. is it necessary to bring both the MP and the PS into the VCP program and then merge the MP into the PS or can i first merge the MP into the PS and take the merged PS into VCP. this would cause the emoloyer to only have to pay one compliance fee. however, my inclination is you have to submit both plans.

there is a ruling. it is even in the corbel documents. the spd has a fee disclosure section and this is one of the choices. i am not asking if it is legal. i know it is. i am wondering if anyone knows how to make it happen on the relius system.

i understand that. the employer will pay the fees for actives, but terminees are expected to pay out of their accounts. this is permissable.

for anyone familiar with relius record keeping can you tell me if there is a method for charging terminees the participant fee for keeping their accounts in the plan? the record keeping people in my office are telling me they dont know of an a method for doing this, however, i find that hard to believe in light of the fact that the law allows you to do this.

the trouble here is no matter how you look at it (either partial term or full term), you have to 100% vest the terminees. here there is not enough money to do that.

they cant use the orphan plan rules because nobody is willing to act as QTA. declaring it a full termination seems like the best course. i would imagine determining how far back to vest the participants is the issue.

client wants to exclude fringe benefits, in this case a use of an automobile. this generates imputed income. they will eclude this from the definition of compensation. however, they also give the client a gross up to compensate for the taxes that result from the imputed income. is the gross up also excludable as a fringe benefit? plan document allows employer to exclude cash and non cash fringes from the definition of comp.

believe it or not it is silent on that issue. it says nothing about who owns files or documents.

Can you declare a full termination of a profit sharing plan if the employer has not made a contribution since 12/03? basically all the employees have left (in several waves) and we are left with a trust and some assets attributable to former employees. the plan is basically an orphan plan at this point as the employer was sold to a foreign investor.

that is one of the most rediculous things the IRS has ever done. for service providers that are responsible for 100's of plans it has become more difficult to notify employees.

upon changing TPAs, under ERISA does a client have a right to receive its data in the format it is created in or can the prior TPA give the data to the client or new TPA in a reasonable but different format.

Can someone please explain how the final 401(k) regs effect the safe harbor notice? do you need to include information about specific plan provisions?