R. Butler

To my knowledge no formal guidance, but see the following link. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=16949

We were hit with a pretty significant ice storm, power has been out since Saturday evening an many areas. Who would Plan Sponsor's contact about requesting extensions for 3/15 deadlines? Since they can always extend a tax return, we are probably more concerned with the ADP/ACP deadline. We don't want to get with the 10% penalty.

Thanks.

We are about to takeover Auto Dealer's Plan. Auto Dealer is owned by ABCD Partnership. I am trying to analyze controlled group issues. Clearly I need to be concerned about other businesses owed ABCD Partnership. It seems to me I should also be concerned with any underlying businesses that may be commonly owned by A, B, C & D as individuals. Am I missing something here? I just want to be safe; employer's are often times reluctant to give me such information & I don't want to ask for more than I have to.

Good news in the Washington Post today. GOP doesn't back Bush savings plan. Happy Days are here again.

I have a CPA, QKA, and a JD. I just spent a year or better teaching myself cross-tested plans. I vote Republican. Now all of its down the tubes. I am going to apply at the mall this evening.

Really I only want to know one thing at this point; do I need to find a new job? We primarily handle DC plans. How long will it take me to become an actuary?

The cases I have seen don't use a controlling interest, but a rather a substantial interest. Maybe they are same, I don't Know. I guess thats my question.

Did you try BenefitsLink job search? You can search by location.

Person A owns 33% of Company XYZ. He is a participant in XYZ's qualified plan. The Plan allows participant's to self-direct investments. Person A wants to invest in an L.L.C. in which he is a 5% owner. All participants would be given the opportunity to invest in the L.L.C. The sources & cases I have read indicate that it may be an issue depending on the degree of ownership. Is 5% enough to make this a prohibited transaction? Any other issues I am missing? Thanks in advance for any guidance.

IRC401, I agree with Mike Preston, they are not related issues. I may not be following your position correctly, but based on your logic it seems that no fees, distribution or otherwise, would be allowed to be charged against a participant who receives only a top minimum contribution.

DOL recently audited ABC, Inc. Plan. DOL concluded that were late deposits in each of the last 3 years. We are filing the 5330. Per the instructions I assume that I must file 3 separate 5330's, since the original filing due dates would have been different for each year. Is this correct? Also, in one of these years we actually did file a 5330, but the DOL has concluded that were additional late deposits. How do I handle this situation? Do I file an amended 5330 remitting the difference between the total due and the amount originally submitted? That appears to be correct since there is actually a box for amended returns, but I am not positive. Thanks in advance for any guidance.

All good suggestions. In this particular case the DRO hasn't been issued yet. The participant and her attorney have been informed of the interpretation as I understand it (as set forth in my initial post.) Participant was advised that the loan issue should be considered in drafting the DRO. Assuming the DRO is in good order, I probably follow QDROphile's suggestion of issuing the conditional determination letter just as an additional precaution. Thanks for all you input.

Thanks for your help. There are QDRO procedures, but this situation really isn't covered. Maybe its time to revise those procedures.

As long as the plan sponsor has not received written notfictaion from the DOL of the failure to file I do not see why you couldn't use the DFVC Program. I would just file a paper copy to Atlanta with a check.

This has been asked before, but I can't understand the answers. How do you handle outstanding loan issues when a QDRO is received? Example: Participant's total balance is $50,000, $10,000 of that is a loan. QDRO specifies 50% to the alternate payee. It seems to me the alternate payee is entitled to $25,000 in liquid assets. The participant's balance is then $25,000, $10,000 of that is still the loan. Is this correct?

If you are using the 5304 or 5305, it states it on the 5304/5305.

I don't see this as Sal Tripodi vs. Dick Wickersham. §1.416-1,T-24 pretty much says that you don't include the receivable unless it is the first plan year or the plan is subject to minimum funding standards. My follow up question to Wickersham, Leslie, etc. would be if receiveables in a profit sharing plan are to be included in the top heavy determination, then in §1.416-1, T-24, what dictinction is the IRS trying to make between those plans subject to 412 and those that are not and also between first year plans and nonfirst year plans? The reg. clearly distinguishes between these plan situations. I've thought about this and I know that we won't change until there is formal, written guidance that changes §1.416-1,T-24.

By the due date of the employer's federal tax return. If you are using the IRS SIMPLE-IRA document, I am fairly certain it states it right on the form. The rule doesn't change for SIMPLE 401(k).

Are you asking by what date the employer matching contributions must be deposited? If that is the question, then generally employer contributions must be made by the due date of the employer's federal tax return, including all valid extensions. This is true even for a SIMPLE-IRA

We have takeover plan. The Plan needs to be updated, but I can't determine ADP/ACP testing methods for 1997-1999. The Plan Sponsor switches TPA's frequently. The Plan Sponsor doesn't have good Plan records for 1997-1999. Prior TPA's are either unable or unwilling to help. Any suggestions on how to handel this?

Is everyone all of the sudden going to include the receivable? I know you a few agents have indicated that you should, but there isn't any formal guidance. This kind of concerns me no matter which method I choose.

I agree with MGB, this is bad idea. Just an example, we have had three people today wanting a loan or some kind of distribution for Christmas. I am not complaining, but it is sad that we feel the need to sacrifice retirement security for a gift. A lot of the people that borrow, won't pay back they will just default. Also from an administrative standpoint I can't see how this would be done withhout creating a fairly heavy burden on the sponsor.

Just so I am absolutely clear, can the RMD due from the IRA be taken from the qualified plan? I have always learned that it could not, but don't know if anything has changed.

Participant A receives a RMD from ABC, Inc. PSP. Assets for ABC, Inc. PSP are held at American Funds. Participant A also has an IRA with American Funds. Participant A's broker has the RMD for the IRA withdrawn from the ABC, Inc. PSP. It is my understanding that although 2 or more IRA's can be aggregated for RMD purposes, and IRA cannot be aggregated with a qualified plan. Has something changed that I am missing? Assuming I am correct that the IRA RMD should not have been taken from the ABC, Inc. PSP, what are the ramifications to the Plan? I can see immediately that withhloding would not have been done correctly. Is there anything else? I don't think so, but just want to double check. (Under the document participant can take in-service distributions any time because he's reached NRA.) Thanks in advance for any guidance.