JanetM

Do you mean for denail of flex reimbursement? Make up simple check list of the most likely causes and use that. Common items - cost incurred before beginning of period, not covered by plan (specific exclusion), substantiation not enough, no funds left to reimburse claim. And you don't have to shout, we are not deaf.

5500s are required by some nonqualified plans. Any non qual plan with assets in trust are required to file.

Am confused. If plan is self insured then all claims and fees to run the plan are paid from sponsors general assets.

3C is for any plan not intended to qualify in 401, 403 or 408. We used to have plan that was never amended to comply with ERISA - was a wasting trust. That was a 3C plan. Not sure about the Puerto Rican Plan.

Who is their right mind would stick a 26 year old in a cash fund. If you are an investing phobic follow JohnGs advice and and go to other Fidelity fund.

The modified cash basis only recognizes the receivables from ER and EE and payables (distributions). Used to be common for small plans to use this form. Look at prior years to see if they used cash, modified cash or accrual and be consistant. Or pick a form and be consistant in the future if you don't like the old way.

We just pay the restricted EEs an annuity and make them collect it over time.

Sorry merlin, you go to circular 570 by US Treasury and find an approved issuer. They you just have to start making phone calls. Here is link to Treasy site for the publication and listing. http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570/c570.html

From rev ruling 92-76 In order to secure an employee's repayment obligation of the restricted amount, the plan provides that prior to receipt of a distribution an employee must agree that upon distribution the employee will promptly deposit in escrow with an acceptable depositary property having a fair market value equal to at least 125 percent of the restricted amount. The plan also provides that the obligation of an employee under the repayment agreement alternatively can be secured or collateralized by posting a bond equal to at least 100 percent of the restricted amount. For this purpose, the bond must be furnished by an insurance company, bonding company or other surety approved by the U.S. Treasury Department as an acceptable surety for federal bonds. The plan also provides that an employee's obligation under the repayment agreement can be secured by a bank letter of credit in an amount equal to at least 100 percent of the restricted amount.

ERISAatty I agree with you. If these non-regular employees are told they are only being hired until future date and don't get benefits then just fix the plan document. No benefits would include no retirement. Retirement is a benefit - they were told up front. Just exclude them by class and be done with it.

Am not an actuary - but IMHO If the plan language allows for total distribution at NRA and provides for additional accrual of benefits for continued service I would think you must provide for 415 increases. At retirement or 70.5 he would have the difference in the accrued benefit less the prior distribution.

You can only force a balance out if it is under the 5,000/1,000 amount - depends on which you plan uses. They could continue to let the amounts sit. From what you are saying you need specific legal counsel, not general advice from the boards. You will have lost arms length transaction if you adopt the old plan in my view. My suggestion is to terminate the plan and let folks do IRA rollovers. Wait you time and then allow them to roll into new plan.

You will have successor plan. Still don't understand the need to end one and start a new one. Just have LLC adopt the old plan.

I must be slow today, non bankruptcy creditors? Are we talking something like mechanics lien?

Yikes, you are really stuck. If you are corp then you would have resolution adopting amendment. If you sole prop you will not. Have you tried contacting the DOL and asking them?

Who drafted the original? Do you need audit? Auditors would have copy in there files.

Depends on the state. Bankruptcy law passed in 2005 exempts up to $1million in IRA and Roth assets from bankruptcy.

Yes if this is control group. You would have to convert his canadian pay to USD and see if that makes him HCE in 2007.

Are the owners of the second company the same as the owners of the first? If there are two owners and one start new company you don't have successor plan. Is this corp, sole proprieter or what? If the ownership is the same, you will have to distribute all the funds to participants (suggest IRA rollover), start the one year clock ticking and then when year is up you can start new plan.

Why make it complicated. Just call it a bonus or something. If it is non qual plan then you have 409A issues. I don't see what motivates this.

I am plan sponsor. I love Relius for 5500 filings. Have used it for over 10 years. Can't chime in on record keeping system. DC is outsourced and Watson Wyatt built our DB database.

My thoughts are - MP plan should have been amended to 0% contributions. Plan language may interfere, is there a requirement for him to be "doing business". He doesn't have eligible compensation under his plan. He may not be allowed to take loan. Does he keep business license updated or file any business or tax return? IMHO I don't see a pressing need to terminate right now. Katrina didn't happen that long ago. He could go up to five years w/o contributions before I would start to worry.

Confused by the question. Plan assets can't be touched by outside lawsuit even if they go bankrupt.

Try this link. http://www.duxcw.com/dcforum/DCForumID5/470.html It is posts to msg board about this problem.

I will play it safe and say lets just flip a coin to decide.