ETA Consulting LLC

They are not subject to any regulatory requirements for being restricted, so the Plan's document "MAY" include language to allow for immediate distribution. You should follow the terms of your written plan to determine what distributions are allowed. Good Luck!

You know there is an approved ERPA list of names online (by State and by Last Name). Can you (at least) locate your name on this list? Not sure if you must include the "-EP" after the number. Please advise if you figure it out. You can't be the only one having this issue. Good Luck!

You're splitting hairs on this one. A good faith amendment is written pursuant to a new law change or IRS regulation. Typically, there is no guidance on the language given the recent implemention of the rule. So, you'd write the amendment in a good faith attempt to implement the new rule. A scrivner's error would be were you state something that you did not intend; where you typically don't operate the plan according to that language (given it is a mistake). Hope this helps clarify the distinction. Good Luck!

Are you paying FICA on the income?

A contribution to a SEP "IS" considered as covered by an employer plan. There is a contingency for SEP contributions made after the calendar year (where the employee is considered as covered in the year the actual deposit was made). This is due to the discretionary nature of the SEP contribution. Don't forget to consider the income level as well. Being covered by a plan at work merely creates a phaseout range (depending on tax filing status) for determining the deductibility of Traditional IRA contributions. Good Luck!

"Like" <- That is me pushing the "Like" button

It may not be exact, but the "Medicare" wages should be very close. I would (at least) start there. Good Luck!

No. Just look at the loan payments as plan assets as soon as they are withheld from the particpants' pay Good Luck!

Not going to happen. Good Luck!

Well, in order to life insurance to exist, it must be offered under the annuity contract. You cannot purchase a life policy in the plan (the way you can for qualified plans). Remember, 403(b)(1)s are annuities and 403(b)(7)s are for brokerage accounts holding "mutual funds only". You can easily, however, purchase a life policy in a 403(b)(9). Good Luck!

Understood. 403(b)s have operated years without the written plan rules. At the same time, the written plan requirements have always existed for those non-profits who were subject to ERISA because of the Employer Contributions. The churches can continue to operate as they always have. I would doubt many of the non-compliance issues the IRS has historically found in audits were from church plans. Schools, on the other hand, is a different story. Anyways, I appreciate your opinion; it's just as valuable as mine Good Luck!

I, respectfully, disagree. The terms are still written within the contract; the same as it has always been prior to the new rules. A church plan enjoys many exceptions that other plans do not. They may cover "ONLY" the pastor if they choose. They "may" cover other employees while giving non-elective contributions to "ONLY" the pastor. That precendent has been long established. I wouldn't begin to suggest that it's better to have something that is not required. To do so is to inject an arbitrary standard that really isn't necessary for church plans. I respect your opinion, but just disagree with it. NOW, if it were a 403(b)(9), then the situation would be entirely different. Good Luck!

You'd use the $146K because that is the statutory definition of his "Earned Income" for plan purposes. Keep in mind that he "MAY" become a "Former Key" employee, and should be treated as such during this analysis; as Former Key Employees are excluded from the analysis. Good Luck!

No, they'll just notify the participant in 2013 that a portion of the distribution was not eligible for rollover because of the failed test. They would merely issue the appropriate 1099R Forms and instruct the participant to remove the appropriate amounts from the IRA. Good Luck!

Essentially, yes. It's business as usual. Many of the IRS changes to 403(b) did not affect church plans. Good Luck!

A church plan does not require a plan document; nor do the universal availability rules (or non-discrimination rules) apply. Good Luck!

Not necessarily. Suppose the employee owning 35% and the ex-employee owning 16% both have rights of first refusal requiring them to sell their shares to Company A before attempting to sell them to someone else. This would create an attribution of that 51% to Company A; making them now own 100% (a Parent - Subsidiary Controlled Group). You'd never know until asking a "potentially" exhaustive series of questions designed to determine if attribution of shares exist. This is merely one of many questions. Hope this helps.

It looks like an Affiliated Service Group (at the very least, under the B-Org rules). Could be a Controlled Group depending on who owns the other 51% and the attribution rules applied to that ownership. Good Luck!

Sure. If it covered "ONLY" self-employed, then no 5500 would be necessary. Good Luck!

1) Merely be eligible to make deferrals does not do it. You'd actually have to make deferrals (or receive some other company contribution/forfeiture allocation) under the plan. 2) You're looking at a 12 month period. It's not segmented. Good Luck!

IRS Notice 87-16. You must actually receive (or actually make deferrals) contributions in order to be considered as covered by a plan at work. The reference point is at any time during the year. Good Luck!

No, don't get caught in semantics. It's just a statement. You would write the statement formatted like a Schedule D form (and that is your letter). Good Luck!

Typically, when a plan requires the spouse (you) of the participant (your wife) to be 100% beneficiary, it is exempt from spousal consent to distributions. Therefore, your spouse would be allowed to take a distribution from the plan without your consent. This is different from designating someone else as beneficiary; it's only taking a distribution. Good Luck!

Sure, she is. First, the IRS doesn't allow "service class" exclusions; where the class being excluded is defined by a customary work schedule (i.e. part-time is anyone working less than 'x' hours per week). Secondly, there are not accrual requirements for deferrals or safe harbor (i.e. 'x' number of hours per year or last day). Nothing should change for a mere reduction in hours. Good Luck!

No. You should continue to follow the terms of the plan. The cashout provisions are reflected in the plan's terms. Good Luck!