kwalified

TIAA reports asset totals based on Total Assets under management which includes contracts that may other wise be excludable (e.g. participants who terminated prior to 1/1/09). For 5500, Sched A, H reporting purposes is it advisable to use those values or do they need to be adjusted down to reflect those accounts that are excludable. Thanks for your thoughts.

Note that the year is in there. I think it could be implied to be just for the 2012 year. However, it could be construed to mean everything after the dates entered. You may want to adjust your forms to say they are for a specific year only. Or even for a specific bonus. Just to avoid any confusion. BG5150 under what part of FT. William is that form? I am not able to locate it. Is it under their "Documents" section? If so, we use Relius so that may be why I can not find it.

A plan allows participants to defer up to 80%. Additionally it allows them to make a separate election to defer up to 80% on a bonus. If a participant decides to only defer lets say 10% of their bonus, can the plan keep that election in place until the participant wants to change it or does the sponsor need to have them fill out a new election whenever a bonus is issued?

Its actually not a calendar year plan. PYE is 8/31. Shutting down the MPP would basically avoid funding with a 500 hour requirement. PS would add greater contribution flexibility.

Let's say as of today the participants (all 3 of them), met the 500 hour requirement to get a MPP contribution.....the plan is then amended to be restated to a profit sharing? The MPP does not have to terminated does it?

Tom 39 participants IN the plan 49 excluded by sponsor for being "PT". No key employees, so TH is not an issue. Oh and the plan just got picked for a random audit

a small PS plan with age 20.5/6 months of service have left off Part Time employees(no more than 49 of them) off their census request for AT LEAST one plan year. Problem is their plan doc does not exclude PT employees from the definition of eligible employees. Only leased, union and alien are excluded, therefore if they work 6 continuous months and are age 20.5 they enter the next plan year. Worst case scenario????

Thanks for weighing in and the cites.

looking at an illustration HCE gets a 13.2% all the NHCE's are getting 4.4%. The 4.4% includes the 3% nonelective. Is this acceptable? I have always been under the impression the nonelective had to be done separately.

great.Thanks for your comments.

Can a Money Purchase be restated to a Profit Sharing mid plan year without the mandatory contribution? I THINK it can be restated retroactively to the beginning of the plan year, yes? I know a Section 204(h) notice is required and full vesting is not required. This is a small plan with a plan year end of 8/31. Thanks

Thanks. Yes he was rehired 4/30/12, not 4/30/11, and I went in and just manually zeroed out his compensation for plan purposes, despite the software giving the allocation. Thanks for your comments.

Plan Year: 5/1/11 -4/30/12 Eligibility: 21/ 1 YOS Entry: quarterly Employee DOH 9/6/10 DOB 8/6/80 Met eligibility: 9/5/11 Terminated: 10/21/11 Employee would have entered the plan 11/1/11, plan doc states that rehired employees who met eligibility but did not become a participant enters the plan on the later of 1) entry date on which they would have entered the plan or 2) the date of their reemployment, which was 4/30/11 (last day of plan year). My software is wanting to give this participant a SH non elective allocation based on compensation earned during the 2011 plan year, but I think that is erroneous. The plan excludes comp before the participant actually enters the plan. Thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks for your response. So she passed away this year age 81, you would use 17.9 factor under the Uniform Life Table and subsequent RMD's to her beneficiary would be under Single Life using his age. She passed in March 2012. Plan year ended July 2012. Question: If he rolled over her benefits to his account would you still use the 2 tables and just have to account for the balances separately?

Owner and his wife, both employed, they have been taking RMD's. She dies this year at age 81. He is beneficiary, currently age 87. Law states you should use single life table in 1.401(a)(9) using beneficiary age instead of Joint Life for her current year RMD. For future plan years how should RMD's be calculated for beneficiary? How should his RMD be calculated in current year? using Joint Life Table?

The highest paid employee in the look back year was $107,000. The sole owner made $100,000. So the six Top Paid would make up the group?

I apologize if I was unclear. The son/daughter do not make compensation to put them in the Top 20%. However, they are considered HCE's due to attribution for Top Paid Group purposes? So if you have 3 HCE's (owner/2 children), then 5 in Top Paid Group, you have 8 total in the Top Paid Group, correct?

Potential plan has 28 employees. Sole owner has daughter/son working. They are the only 3 HCE's. Fails ADP. When using Top Paid Election, the son/daughter are excluded correct, unless their income falls in Top 20%?

Masteff, if they ultimately elected to amend using 1.414 basis, would they also be required to elect 415 safe harbor comp instead of their current W-2? Incidentally their W-2 wages are wages under Sec. 6041, 6051 and 6052. Wages within the meaning of 3401(a)

a 2 participant plan has an insurance policy on one of the participants. the premiums have been paid on the policy by policy loans for the past few years, the participant is concerned that having a loan on a policy owned by the plan could be problematic. Seems as if he would have investigated this prior to issuing the loan. However, would there be any pitfalls after the fact?

a SH 401 plan's def of comp is W-2 wages including 401(k), 125, 132(f),414(h)pickup) only excludes comp while not a participant in the plan. The plan sponsor has not included excess life insurance amounts in the definition of comp due to the fact that the employee does not receive any cash. However, it is footnoted for inclusion in the employee's taxable income. The auditor thinks that it MAY be subject to deferral and match calculations. If so, I suspect a retroactive amendment could exclude such benefit using SCP? The plan utilizes the basic SH match formula.

Hello, Have not worked with an LLC lately. Recently came across a small SH 401(k). 3 partners. All 3 partners have appx same membership %. With lowest at 32%. His SE earnings (Box 14a) was $315,838 for 2011. I recall deducting Sec 179 from that ($12,083) and then I believe you deduct deferrals ($22,000), the sum of which you multiply by .9235 (.9435 this year) then multiply that sum by .0145 of which you deduct from the previous sum(after .9235), which you arrive at earnings to calculate SH match/p.s.? Am I on track? Wayyyyyyy off?

1) Does disclosure apply to pooled accounts if participants are paying TPA fees? 2) What if a participant directed plan is paying TPA fees from forefeiture/holding account and it does not directly come from participants accounts? 3) How should disclosure be structured if fees are being paid based on an account percentage? Surely you can not list each participant on a page and disclose what each one pays in admin fees.

Adviser suggested a DB plan but that seems too archaic and costly for one participant. He is 58, has nothing in retirement, makes $240K a year and has about $72K to play with annually. I suggested a SEP or Uni-K and/or 412(i) plan. Agree? Disagree?

I don't see it possible, but I thought I would ask. A small 403(b), non church, 10 participants maintains a 403(b) that currently funds a 6% nonelective. They are considering greater employer funding for employees who have been working longer. That would be discriminatory under the 403(b) regs, yes?