k man

this is what you get when a bunch of excited politicians attempt to help people.

is there any documentation requirement for distributions made under the Katrina legislation?

how about with respect to hardship distributions or something similar to "qualified katrina distributions?" why isn't 2005-128 posted on the irs website.

anyone aware of whether the service is going to apply the katrina hardship rules to wilma victims?

it may not have sponsors because there are two other bills floating around. the grassley bill just passed though committee but that particular bill does not contain the PT exception. my focus is on weither fiduciaries (IA's) can provide investment advice to both participants and the plan. as it stands right now i think that would be a PT.

has there been any movement on the pending legilation? if i recall the house passed legislation making which would permit plan fiduciaries to provide advice to participants.

i am not sure i agree with your response. if the employer fails to follow the salary deferral agreement it might be a qualification issue. seems very similar to exclusion of an eligible employee.

client neglected to deduct salary deferral amount as well as make the matching contribution on the final paycheck for several employees. the client's auditor discovered. is it necessary for the employer to make the contribution and the match on behalf of the group of terminees? is this even a qualification failure?

is there authority for that? i could not find it anywhere.

The IRS gave relief as to returns and minimum funding. does the same relief apply to the deadline for making profit sharing contributions?

i called lew leslie and he cant help me. he works in the VCP area.

the client had documents sitting around and decided to sign and send docs to IRS one year after receipt. by that point they were late. IRS wants client to pay 3000 dollar sanction rather than 750, the fee they would be eligible for had the submitted under VCP. their justification is they (the IRS) discovered the failure rather than the client bringing the error to the attention of the IRS through a VCP scenerio. I think this is unduly harsh under the circumstances. plan is small and plan sponsor did in effect turn himself in by submitting document. anyone have any suggestions on how to deal with the service on this?

i was thinking no to general partner but limited i thought maybe. i appreciate your responses.

can a plan be a limited or general partner?

i know an ESOP must report on the 5500 the income distribution it receives as an S-Shareholder. where/how is this reported on the 5500?

i know the ESOP must report on the 5500 the income distribution it receives as an S-Shareholder. where/how is this reported on the 5500?

i am not sure why they use only an SA but there are other alternatives to shares. they could use Depository Receipts which are receipts for shares of a foreign corp.

the attorney for the hedge fund says that they use a subscription agreement in lieu of shares and that the SA is held by the domestic investor. he says others rely on this in order to meet the indicia of ownership rule. what do you think?

never mind i found it. thanks,.

is there anything in ERISA that says the assets must be located in the US? we have clients that want to invest in offshore hedgefunds and other types of investments. i dont think there is anything that prohibits it.

do you think it is appropriate to required the parent/guardian of a minor beneficiary to open an UGMA account in order to receive the distribution from a401(k)? the plan allows for this but it also says you can just make the check payable tot he minor?

i dont see any reason why not but thought i would put this out there. approximately 10% of the participants did not receive top heavy mins for two plan years. dollar amounts are relatively small - 11,000 and 15,000 for each year respectively. i would like to self correct rather than use vcp. any thoughts.

the employee is terminating before 59 1/2 and will receive a lump sum distribution. with respect to lump sum distributions of employer stock, the code says that the employee is not taxed on the NUA. in that case do they have to pay the 10% penalty and if so would it only be on the basis portion of the distribution?

the plan document basically says that the plan creates an unsecured claim on behalf of the participants and constitutes a mere contractual obligation. i think the solution here is for the employer to amend the plan and say contributions will not be made going forward. then they can catch up and make up the contributions they never made. a correction from my initial post. in addition to the investment returns not being good, the company has failed to make contributions for some years.

i am looking to make a preliminary determination on my own. what is the general rule of thumb when dealing with NQDC plans? can employers reduce benefits unilaterally if they are not vested?