JanetM

We do have det letters. It is funny, in 8 years I have had two people ask about this when rehired. Most who take the cash out spend it and the ones who rollover don't oftern roll back to plan.

ERISA counsel. Based on fact that only profit sharing has vesting. Profit sharing plan used to be separate plan from 401k. Profit sharing plan does not provide for after tax sources. Ergo you can not return after tax funds to profit sharing plan. After we merged PS and 401k into one - the rule followed.

We do allow it (am sponsor not TPA) in our four dc plans. Participant must returns to get reinstated forfeitures. Since only p/s sharing has vesting and match is on on pretax amounts all amounts must come in either as rollover from IRA or another plan. Amounts cashed out and taxed at distribution can not be returned to plan and receive reinstatement of forfeited amounts. Look at plan and see is plan allows after tax sources and what types of rollovers you can accept.

I don't see that you have distributable event that will allow for an annual distribution. If any of the amount in 403b is from rollover he can move that.

That is where I would start. I would try to include the 2004 filing if you have solid grounds for groveling and begging. Years ago I had this with a few of clients. The only circumstance the IRS allowed as grounds to waive the fees was when the staffing changed. The person who had been signing and filing the return was replaced and the incoming person thought the business owner signed the return. The owner assumed the new controller signed the return.

Try the state bar association.

Works for me too.

Am not a lawyer - so this is just IMHO. On the one hand you have resigned and are not required to do work for the client. But on the other you hold the assets and records. My question is - why treat this as different from plan sponsor asking to send assets and records to ABC company? If I were you I would send strongly worded letter to employer and explain that they must make a decision on who will take over. Explain they can not just orphan the plan.

My experience has been that this won't increase participation. If a discretionary match is made on payroll basis and the participants can see it immediately - yes that may increase participation. But to say you might make contribution - you are also saying you might not.

As I sit here with my plan sponsor fiduciary hat on and am horrifed. We do not allow folks to take loans and then stop making loan payemnts. Those folks in financial distress don't need the tax or the penalty on top of their debt. That is why Plan loans now receive favorable treatment in bankruptcy.

Take it from the account and use it to fund future sh amounts. Normally a simple thing to do.

That is interesting. I am listed on my exhusbands IRA, TSP account, and life insurance. Or divorce decree says he keeps his accounts and I keep mine. The ex spouse waived her right at the time of divorce. Don't see how that impacts the IRA holders choice to give it to her later.

Normally the IRA custodian looks at beneficiary form on file and doesn't look beyond that. Why would they question it, if it is valid form? Just because the person is divorced does not invalidate beneficiary forms. We see it all the time. Folks have change in family status and forget to change all the forms.

The divorce decree and property settlement just say she isn't entitled to any part of retirement funds at the time of divorce and QDRO will not be done. Since she is the named beneficiary she should get the account.

Why make it difficult. Use 1/01/07 for effective date and allow anyone employeed to be in. I don't see the point in having eligibility of 1 year for deferrals. If the doc is so stingy not to share the wealth, use the one year for employer contributions (SH, match, ps). Your original idea doesn't pass the smell test. If plan is effective on 7/01 it looks very discriminatory to use those employeed on 01/01.

If the plan allows only one loan at a time you can't technically refinance. That would mean for just a short period of time there are two loans.

As a plan sponsor I am fed up with training children hired by audit firms to do the audit. First off they don't know a db from a dc plan.

I would also be questioning the sponsor to ensure they are giving out safe harbor notice. Don't see how everysinge employee including the owner are passing up more employer money. This one doesn't pass the smell test.

I will make it clearer. 50K max is reduced by highest balance of 25K. New loan amount 25K. new loan and highest balance added together can't exceed 50k. New loan can be 25k. If they go over the 25k they must pay the amount back by the due date of the original loan. They do not start new 5 year clock under section 72p.

If the plan allows this. Max is $50,000, less highest balance of $25,000 leaves $25,000 available.

The SEP is your only real option.

Am sure the service will disqualify the plan. Another concern she now has is the capital gains she will pay when she sells the land. It was a dumb move to basically write off the cost basis by this transfer. BTW if she already sold the land and used the original basis not the $10 you can add tax evasion.

BBB, Chamber of Commerce, local business organizations, and local trade groups are also great places to find small business owners that are potential clients.

You don't say if this is DB or DC. If this is DC, was the amount segregated into separate account? If it was just give AP the account. If this was not segregated, I would go back to participant, AP and lawyers and get something in writing from them. They need to agree, in writing, on the adjustment to original QDRO.

Its a facts and circumstances issue. Was the plan put in for exclusive benefit of employees (not just HCEs)? Is the reason for no contributions that there was no business profit for the two years? Treasury reg 1.401-1(b) is the cite.