Jim Chad

At a seminar by the DOL, the speaker said you should save for 6 years STARTING FROM THE DUE DATE OF THE 5500. So she was saying 8 years. 8 years were her actual words. I also save distribution files forever. I am a bit paranoid about someone's spouse coming to collect in 20 years. I would like to be able to show when it was paid out. Of course, on takeover plans, I can only do so much.

From the TPA view of things, rollovers seem to go well, once everyone is thinking of the job in 2 parts. 1. There is the paperwork to get the money out of the current IRA or Qualified Plan. 2. There is the paperwork to set up the new account or prepare the current Plan to accept the money. I have heard of the Plans not accepting the rollover until they see a determination letter on the distribution Plan. When I have received the request, I have always had a letter to give them. Does anyone know what they do if the Plan has never applied for a letter?

One suggestion would be to have the premium conversion part of a cafeteria plan set up so that the employee share is pre tax.

Thank you for everyone who added to this thread. I am going to summarize what You all helped me come up with. If I want to exclude comp prior to entry for the 3% SHNEC, I cannot exclude HCE's from SHNEC and fill in with a discretionary non - elective. So I have to decide when the flexibility is important enough to give up something the client almost always seems to want. I am definitely going to put this in all of my cross tested plans. I'm probably giving up nothing and I have once had the problem of a 23 year old son coming into the Plan. The 3% SHNEC gave him a huge EBAR. Excluding HCE's will give me the flexibility I need to deal with this. Thanks again for all of the help.

BG5150 CONGRATULATIONS!! Wish you all the happiness in the world.

If the 3% SHNEC is not made, they do not have a safe harbor pass on the ADP. I would think they would have to do the ADP test on current year basis and do any required refunds to HCE's. My guess....FWIW

Since no one else has responded to this directly, maybe some thoughts on a slightly different situation will help. Years ago when I was administering Money Purchase Pension and 401(k) combinations, people wanted to put them together when they went to a platform like John Hancock or Transamerica. Commingling was a huge benefit in pricing. Since then I have had 2 of these combination plans audited by the IRS and they showed no concern at all. They were both DC Plans, but they did have different names and EINs. Hope this helps.

I meant to say that I thought the 3% discretionary non elective will cause the Plan to lose the Top Heavy Exemption.

Sheila, I think you can do what you are suggesting as long as you pass coverage. What I think would break you out of safe harbor would be giving the 3% discretionary non elective to the HCE's.

When I restate for EGTRRA, I was considering excluding HCE's from SHNEC and giving them a discretionary non elective. This would allow the owners to skip their 3% in bad years. Am I right in thinking this would eliminate the Top Heavy Exemption? If this is correct, I would not be able to exclude comp prior to entry for the 3% SHNEC., in years the Plan is Top Heavy.

I have never seen anything in a document or loan policy that would prevent a Participant from paying off the loan early. It is done quite often. If there is nothing in your document or loan policy that prevents early payoff, I would think this would be fine.

I got a call yesterday that the software is due to come out in mid June.

I know nothing about Puerto Rico, so I did not answer before. But now I can. You are correct. If there are no HCE's in the Plan, You cannot fail Coverage or Nondiscrimination testing.

Thank you, Mike!

Am I right in thinking that I loss ABT for both Coverage and Nondiscrim? Do you think that is a good trade-off?

The new EGTRRA Volume submitter has a check box to choose "Each Participant constitutes a separate classification" I am thinking about using this for every 401(k) Plan. This would give extra flexibility in the future as goals and circumstances change. I believe I can allocate on a basis that happens to match permitted disparity. And, since I will not have Permitted disparity in my document, I will not need the PPA disclosure for it. I think every year I will be able to choose the integration level. This seems to good to be true. I would sure like to hear what others think.

I'm going to a volume submitter for EGTRRA. But the Corbel nonstandardized GUST doc had both options for hardship.

Thanks to everyone for the input. Can I get the best of both worlds by not using safe harbor option in the adoption agreement, so I have all of the advantages mentioned by QDROphile. And have an administrative policy that looks a lot like the safe harbor events?

I have a few Plans that want amendments, but I am especially in a hurry for the documents for two Plans ready to start up. I just saw J4FKBC's reply and thought the famous words OH S>>>>!!!

Been a documents and admin user for years. I received CD with the volume submitter document and the Adoption agreements for the PS, MPP and 401(k) as well as the IRS approval letters. Now I am looking for the software I have paid for. (And, yes, I do mean adoption agreement for a volume submitter) Is it available yet?

In looking at the website, I am confused. Is the EGTRRA Volume submitter software available for stand alone PC? If yes, can you tell me what the file is called?

I need to say it differently to be sure I understand. 401(k) deferrals can not be used for in-service-withdrawals except for a few conditions such as over age 59 1/2 or hardship. Profit sharing can have in service withdrawals and any age. Are you trying to limit in service withdrawals to hardships only?

In looking at the EGTRRA Volume submitter document, the adoption agreement has 24 pages of 7 appendices, (some of which need to be signed). In the past I have put the adoption agreement in the first section of a 3-ring binder. I am looking for ideas on how to organize this. I am going to try to write a table of contents. But since each appendix starts numbering at 1, that will not be great. Another thought, some of the appendices may not apply. Do we need to give those to the client? When I give the document to an IRS auditor: do I need to include the appendices that do not apply? My first thought is no to both questions. But they are part of the approved document, so I'm not sure. Related question: This year I am going to keep an electronic copy. Do people keep signed or unsigned copies, electronically?

Does the retirement age in a 401(k) Profit sharing Plan (with no Joint and Survivor options, or should I say no annuity options?) have any significance other than that is the age when everyone is 100% vested?

I'm sorry my question wasn't more clear. I changed the force out level on many plans to $1,000 because I did not have an IRA provider, back then. I do now. And I want to change it back to $5,000 with all amounts over $1,000 going to an IRA. Thank you to every one who responded. Especially, thank you for reminding me that it needs to be set up with the IRA provider and disclosed to Participants.