FJR

Can Relius allocate a contribution of a specific dollar amount. We have a Non qualified plan that gives each eligible participant $300.00. Any suggestions on how Relius can do this?

Have a QDRO that calls for a specific amount to be segragated to the AP as of the valuation date of the plan. It also says to include earnings up to the time of segregation, but the segregated amount can't be less than the specific amount. This plan is pooled and not participant directed. The plan is valued every 6 months. The plan has experienced losses, so the amount the AP would get is less than what was specified. Again, the DRO spells out that the amount being segregated can't be less than the specified amount. Can this be done? Seems like the plan will suffer by not allocating the losses to the AP. Thanks

I have a frozen Money Purchase plan in 2001. Do I need to file a Sch. R? If so, what information do we put? There were no payouts for the year. Thanks

I have a client who has a 401(k) that includes all employees. Document does not say to exclude members of a collective barganing agreement. A few years later, the company now has employees that are part of a cba and are enrolled in the plan. They contribute and receive a match. Do I automatically test this group seperatly? Even though the document includes these employees. Free pass on the ACP test? Anything else would be appreciated. What other admin. issues to worry about?

Doesn't it depend on what the definition for the "limitation year" is to determine 415? What if the limitation year is defined as the calendar year ending within current plan year. So if the plan year ends 9/30/02 wouldn't the 415 limit be 40,000?

Tom, our document defines a year of service for eligibility as 12 consecutive months of service with 1,000 hrs. So wouldn't 2 years of service be 24 consecutive months? I think this would get you away from the problem in your example.

Can you have a 2 year eligibility and also have dual entry? Jan. 1 and Jul. 1 for example.. I know you can't for the pre-tax portion, but what about the match and profit sharing? Thanks

Have a Potential client who currently sponsors a 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan that is top-heavy. Under current law, they feel the plan is useless, because of the top heavy min. I have explained under EGTRRA, they can utilize the safe harbor match and contribute upto the max. 401(k) and match $ for $ upto 4% of what they contribute and not worry about top heavy. With all that, they are considering changing to a SIMPLE IRA. Does EGTRRA apply to SIMPLE IRAs? If so, can they contibute upto 7,000 and match another 3% for those who defer based on any salary. In other words, what if someone earns 10,000 can they contribute 7K? And do they have to worry about top heavy given the fact the old plan was? Any help is appreciated. I still think 401(k) safe harbor is better....

Anyone want to run down the compliance testing limits under new tax law for their 9/30/02 plans. Might be a good refresher for everyone. Annual Compensation limit ? 415© Annual Additons ? HCE Threshold ? 404 (a) (3) Deductibility of Contributions ? i.e. 25% Catch-up availability ? Assume plan is amended for GUST/EGTRRA:)

Just curious, what in gods name do you need these reports for?

When does the increase from 15% to 25% take place for Profit Sharing Plans? I have a Profit Sharing and Money Purchase with a 9/30 plan year end. Can we merge the Money Purchase now and get the 25% in the Profit Sharing in plan year ending 9/30/02? Or is it plan years starting in 2002?

Anyone out there know of any literature that compares different types of plans under the new tax laws. For example, a chart comparing SEP's, SIMPLEs, 401(k)'s Safe Harbors etc.... Thanks for the help

Can anyone give some basics for a TPA in administrating a Non-qualified Deferred Comp. Plan. We currently recordkeep an existing plan and calculate the figures for which the participants are entitled. The Company makes contributions to the trust to meet its obligations. There are two types of contributions. One from the Participants, to have cash compensation from bonus or commission etc. and the other is tied to the 415 limits and comp. limits in their DC plan. What do most TPAs provide as a service. Thanks

Just want to confirm this with anyone: Plan year ends 3/31/02. Limitation year is the plan year. We are using the following. Annual addition = 40,000 Compensation = 170,000 Salary Deferral = N/A Now for EGTRRA, the company has not signed off on any amendment yet. Does the new EGTRRA laws still go into effect starting after 12/31/01. For example can the new 415 limits go into effect for the 3/31/02 PYE? What others are effected? Any other insight would be appreciated

John, I think your refering to non-resident aliens. Not illegal aliens. Most plans will exclude if they are non-resident. If they are coming into the country illegaly and the client is employing them, I would think he has got bigger problems. Escpecially in light of 9/11.

We are new to Relius and was wondering if anyone out there uses Microsoft Word to produce reports such as participant statements. We do not currently have Crystal and do not have any capability of customizing the Participant Statements to our liking. If someone does export the data to a word format, I would greatly appreciate some input.

Richard, good point. So what you are saying, if you put in a discretionary match, in addition to the safe harbor, you can still potentially get away with putting in $0.00 for the participant. Based on my example above. Just doesn't seem right...

Anything wrong with a sole proprietor with one employee doing the following: In 2002, Safe Harbor Match at 100% first 4. Sole Prop. puts in $11,000 and employee puts in $0.00. Sole Prop. gets the $8,0 00 Safe Harbor match(NEI over 200K). Meanwhile, the employee so far Still gets $0. Anything wrong with this? Under EGTRRA if I read it correctly, this is OK? I assume a P/S contribution can also go in.

I am sure this has come up before, but here it goes again. Who has more liability as a trustee. A plan that does not allow for participant self-direction, i.e. a pooled investment that hires a money manager, has a written investment policy, makes decisions quarterly with investment manager. Or, a participant self-directed plan where the participants choose among 12-15 funds. Again, from a trustee standpoint, which scenario carries more liability? Thanks

With the mad rush of merging MPP's with existing Profit Sharing plans, we were looking for some clarification. Our stance is not to step up the vesting once the MP is merged with the PS Plan and to track as a Money Purchase source for J&S reasons. We use a prototype, the question is when someone is paid out of the PS plan and has a non-vested interest in the MP source, what happens to the forfeitures? I didn't see anything in the document that references that. Does it become a forfeiture like the Profit Sharing? Follow the what the document says about non-elective contribution forf? Thanks

Tom, so what you are saying is that in 2002 the rules change when you have a top heavy plan with 2 different eligibility definitions. Meaning under the old rule you would have to contribute at least a top heavy minimum to those who come in immediately. Starting in 2002 having an immediate eligibility for the 401(k) cont. and 1 year wait for 3% safe harbor, you would not owe a TH contribution for the immediates?

Just a refresher. If you have a 401(k) safe harbor plan with 1 year(1000 hrs) and 21 for eligibility and later decide to amend for immediate eligibility to defer and keep the 1 year for safe harbor and the plan is top heavy. The result would be to still give the safe harbor to those that satisfy the 1 year eligibility, but also give the immediates a top heavy min. contribution? Any suggestions

They could also be an owner who is freeing up some cash flow. I have some instances that the owner does not draw and has other sources to keep him alive.

We just took over a profit sharing plan that has its investments pooled with a brokerage firm. The Valuation Date is the last day of the plan year. The client typically pays terminated particpants out several months after the Val. Date. Can someone point me to any irs ruling on the timing of payouts and Valuation Dates. Lets assume 6 or 7 months has passed, and the document is silent on the timing of the re-valuation of participant balances. What do most people do? Pay out on previous Val Date or do an interim valuation? Thanks

Is it possible to have a plan that has no key employees. I have a non-profit org. that is sponsoring a 401(k) but has no owners or officers. It is made up of a board of directors who are non paid and won't be in the plan. So, for top heavy issues could you not have any key ee's in the plan and avoid being top heavy all together?