pmacduff

did you read the instructions for 2(g)? See the attached.

Dave - I think the solution might be for you to run more than one eligibility transaction. I know it should bring them in, but I have been running my semi-annuals actually with 3 eligibility transactions; 01/01, 07/01 and 12/31. It seems to work for me. Hope this helps. Patti

Yes Tom - you have to verify again for version 7.0 ! So much for me being proud of myself for designing so many of them to suit my needs! Maybe some day Relius and Crystal will develop a way to reverify in groups. Oh well, such is life....

Did you remember to "verify database" on your custom reports in Report Writer? Even if you have "verify on every print" checked, I know that with Version 7.0, I had to go into each one of my custom reports and perform that function to update some of the database fields that were changed or modified with the new version. If you haven't done that, you may want to try and then rerun. Hope this helps. - Patti

We use Relius and it does allow us to enter adjusted loan payments if we need to. We can enter any mix of principal and interest or enter just principal or just interest. I think partial or incorrect loan repays are a "pain" in any software! You're correct though, participants assume sometimes that plan loans are set up to be like the bank mortgage or car loan where you can pay varying amounts. I try to get all plan participants to stick to the amortization unless they are paying off the loan balance in full.

R. Butler - As I'm sure that Tom Poje would agree with me...no one is an idioit when it comes to Relius! Don't beat yourself up...there are plenty of times when the rest of us are struggling with something which turns out to be equally as simple to correct...so many variables in the specs...that's what makes us all human beings (including the Relius programmers ) !

According to the way my software and instructions state, that 4B code for insurance is only applicable to Welfare Benefit Plans, not Pension Plans. As a matter of fact, if you click on the "IRS/PWBA instructions after you check the Pension Plan box, the "4" options are not even available, you have to move down to the Welfare benefits line, there it shows 4B for life insurance.

Yes, terminated employees with balances are still "participants entitled to future payments" for purposes of 7c. Perhaps you can get the client to take a more aggressive approach to getting former employees paid out, ie., sending out letters more often reminding them that they are eligible for distribution. I find many former participants want the monies under their own control and finally realize that they will have more control if they roll the balance to an IRA. Also, distributions are much easier from their IRA in the event of an emergency, might take a lot longer from the Qualified Plan, if even available.... just some ideas.

Yes - there is an option right on the ADP/ACP test menu - "statutory exclusions" which, if you check, will exclude.

Just got this memo from ASPA today via e-mail. I put it in Word, hope everyone can access.

The "P" code means "previous" and was, in fact, taxable in the 2000 year, should've been included on your 2000 return. The 1099-R the following year as you received it is informational for your records. As far as amending your 2000 return, I'm a pension person, not familiar with personal taxes, so will have to defer that part of your question. However, my assumption is that you would have to file an amened 2000 return...others care to comment?

I haven't tried this myself, but when you are in the Non-discrimination testing, there is a "divisions" flag. The Relius Help screen indicates that you can use this flag to choose which divisions to include on your test, so I believe you could simply check all of the includable divisions. Hope this works/helps. Patti

I agree "wholeheartedly", that was my take as well, if you never satisfy eligibility, you would need to start over each time, until such time as you did complete 6 consecutive months. I also had the same thought for BIS rules; ie., they come into play once you are a participant, not before. Thanks for the input! Others agree or disagree??

The mandatory 20% withholding applies to "eligible rollover distributions" only, therefore would not apply to an age 70 1/2 minimum required distribution.

I have a calendar 401(k) plan with 6 months of eligibility, quarterly entry dates. This client's industry is such that employees are constantly coming & going. If an employee works for 2 months, leaves and returns 2 months later, do I have to count the original two months? I was under the impression that the employee "starts over" since they never became a participant. If you look at a calendar year, let's say an employee works Feb, Mar and April, leaves, then returns Oct, Nov & Dec. Do they enter January 1st or can I wait until April 1st (provided they remain employed)? The document is using the elapsed time" method. Any input is appreciated.

If out by March 15th, (1) the refund is taxable to the employee on the prior year tax return (ie., 2001; due 04/15/2002). If they have already filed 2001, they would have to file an amended return. (2) The 1099-R form is completed the following January usually by the Investment Firm or TPA Firm and is coded with a "P" meaning taxable in the previous year. The 1099-R copy for the participant is informational at that point and to be kept with the participant's individual return where the income was reported (2001 in this example). The form 1096 remittance form will notify the IRS that the refund was given before March 15th and was taxable to the participant in 2001 (code "P"). If the individual was audited, the IRS would then check to make sure that the refund was claimed as part of the participant's 2001 income. Lastly (3) The W-2 form does NOT get changed. The individual did defer that amount pretax, and, since they will be including the refunded amount on their personal return, the taxes will be paid. Adjusting the W-2 would result in double taxation of those dollars. Again, the 1099-R the following January to be kept with the 2001 return will provide documentation of the refund and amount. Hope this was helpful.

Pax - I agree, but in defense of the employees, the original post does say that it is a non-profit organization - I worked with some not-for-profits myself including a large church plan, there were many participants who wanted to refuse Pension benefits because they did not want to "put an undue financial burden" on their Church as Employer. I know that it isn't logical to a lot of us, but just wanted to point out that there could be other motivation for an employee to refuse benefits.

I have not yet used Word for statements, but I have used it for the Plan Specifications and some other reports. I'm on version 7.1 and, unfortunately, a change was made from Relius 6.0 to 7.0 (& 7.1) which makes it difficult to do edits in Word. I was told by Support that it has to do with the way Relius & Crystal save the "Word" reports now. If you are using Relius 6.0, you can save to a Word file and edit as you need to. Sorry I could not be more helpful!

Doug - I'm on 7.0 (SP2) and have not yet upgraded to 7.1. I can still export vesting percentages through a DER. I just export it to a text file and open it in Excel. I know that you were talking about something alittle more elaborate than just vested %s, so I don't know if that is helpful. Did you say that you previously had a DER that worked for you to export the data you wanted? I agree with you on the vesting issue, we constantly "spot check" reports and double check Quantech's calcs. Vesting can be a nightmare, especially on a takeover case. Sorry I wasn't more help. Patti

I remember this from my very first days learning about pensions..."substantial and recurring contributions". I looked in the Pension Answer Book and Q1:22 states: "Annual contributions to a profit sharing plan are not usually required. Further a company that has not done well in a particular year may decide to make either a minimal contribution or no contribution at all for that year. Nevertheless, a profit sharing plan is not permanent unless contributions are "recurring and substantial."" (Treas Reg 1.401-1(B)(2)

There isn't a simple answer to your question. There have been other discussions on these boards as to how easy or hard it is to comply with 404© to reduce your fiduciary liability with respect to allowing participant direction. You may want to look around at those. I don't think you can say that a Trustee of one or the other types of investments (directed or pooled) has more or less liability with so very many factors involved. Just my opinion, anyone else out there?

I did check my reports and the dates are ok. One other thing; you probably knew this, but when you are in Crystal, remember to verify the database on the reports; when versions are upgraded some of the database items change, report date may be one, I'm not sure. I have a lot of custom reports, and I went through and did all of them individually to be sure that the database files were verified and updated. Good luck, I know it's frustrating when Support can't help!

What report(s) is it happening on? I have been on version 7.0 SP2 for a time now (stand alone) and haven't noticed that problem. The thing I was thinking was, maybe check the printer you are using, I had to switch my default printer from a LaserJet 4050 (which I actually have) to a LaserJet 4 so that when I print the Summary of Accounts, I'm not prompted to load paper every time. (That was getting to be a pain!!!). My thought is that your printer default might be causing the digit to drop?! Just a thought, and, if you let me know which reports, I will double check that I'm not having the problem on any of them. Don't know if it makes a difference, but I'm also still on Windows 98. Patti

I've been using 7.0 - I've only been using Relius (& Quantech) for about a year and a half and am still trying to get used to it overall. One of the things I dislike most, however, is that, for example, in the change from version 6.0 to 7.0, I find things that aren't working properly that used to. And sometimes it is things that haven't/shouldn't have been changed or updated! (that worked fine before, even through the service packs!). That drives me crazy. Also, I was spoiled by our prior software vendor because their customer service was great! Someone was always accessible, none of this "incident" support stuff or waiting for a callback/e-mail. Sorry, I just had to vent. Other than that, it seems to be working fine, I like the fact that you can now code dual eligibility for different sources. (we have clients with immediate for deferral but wait for match/ps). If I think of other things, I'll add another post. Good Luck!

jeanine - The problem is that you won't find a "pension administrator" position in those types of salary surveys. I think our field is just too specific. In fact, you will rarely find any type of pension position in those types of surveys, I think that is why ASPA decided to create one (and charge for it!!!)