Jump to content

Zorro1k

Registered
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    50

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums (Message Boards)

Everything posted by Zorro1k

  1. Zorro1k
    I'm not sure that is it. I understand that it is for failures before 12/31/2020. The correction method clearly applies to plans that have an auto-enrollment feature that fail to enroll participants. Can this correction method also be used if a plan starts an auto-enrollment feature in a plan and, upon implementation, fails to enroll participants (as opposed to being a newly eligible participant in an existing auto-enroll plan)?
  2. Zorro1k
    Does anyone know if under Rev. Proc. 2015-28 a correction can be made if the failure comes from a failure to auto-enroll when implementing a new auto-enrollment feature versus failing to enroll a participant in an existing auto-enroll plan? If I implement the feature and miss participants, are the reduced correction fees available?
  3. Zorro1k
    I'm really wondering abut distributions in a funded plan not under any 436 restrictions. Assuming the plan does not offer a partial withdrawal option can it be amended to do so? If it can, what terms are allowable for the amount available for partial withdrawal? Can it be a lump sum equivalent against which a participant can make a withdrawal at any time in any amount?
  4. Zorro1k
    I am wondering about partial distribution as an optional form of distribution that a participant can elect. Not a distribution mandated on account of 436.
  5. Zorro1k
    That is what I thought. Have a plan that wants to add it as an optional form. I see partial withdrawal as an option in an IRS approved prototype plan. I can't locate am actual prohibition against it so if anyone could point me in that direction, I'd appreciate it.
  6. Zorro1k
    Can a DB plan allow for partial withdrawal as a distribution option?
  7. Zorro1k
    1&2. Defined under QPSA section if the participant is unmarried with a vested interest and has a child 21 or younger benefit is payable to child that would have been payable to spouse. There is no other default beneficiary listed (and no other beneficiary designated). 4. It is a DB plan.
  8. Zorro1k
    Child wasn't married at the time to my knowledge. Yes, drafted by an experienced attorney.
  9. Zorro1k
    So if the child was under 21 at the time of death the child is a beneficiary.
  10. Zorro1k
    For deceased participant who died before receiving benefits, if a plan has a default beneficiary for an unmarried participant for children under 21, am I correct in thinking that this refers to the age of the child at the time of the participant's death? If so, where is the support for that?
  11. Zorro1k
    Are there regulations covering the timely deposit of funds for non-electing church 403(b) plans?
  12. Zorro1k
    Client opened a SEP with bank in 2009. Client does not have original paperwork and claims to not have prepared SEP plan doc. She funded in 2009 - 2013 (in 09-10 based on schedule c, from 2011 on she incorporated and based contributions on w-2). She hired an employee in 2014 who earned $65,000. Files taxes on 1120s and is on extension. Wants to fund for 2014 but wants to exclude employee. Can client exclude the employee from the plan? If not, can client start a new and separate SEP for employees other than owner?
  13. Zorro1k
    I'm having the same issue. I appreciate the regulation cite regarding an exception to anti-assignment. I'm confused by the situation. I agree with the position that simply gifting it is the best solution. The exception for anti-assignment seems to be limited to a maximum of 10% of the benefit. So even if she were to successfully direct the PA to pay the third party, she'd still be receiving 90% of the benefit. Am I correct?
  14. Zorro1k
    Amount is $18,000. Plan is a small group of doctors. All expenses have been paid. I don't yet know the answer to the last question.
  15. Zorro1k
    I'm still trying to figure our what the asset was. There is an unsigned amendment I have which changed the language from reversion to the employer to distribution to participants. I'm trying to nail down if that amendment was signed and what the terms of the plan actually are. Regardless, I'm assuming since all plan assets have not been distributed that they need to file 5500s going back to the last one which they thought was the final one. I'm hoping that they can take advantage of the delinquent filer VCP which has a fee of $10/day capped at $1,500 for a small plan.
  16. Zorro1k
    If a DB plan believed that all assets were paid out after termination and later discovered additional assets but had been operating as if terminated for a few years (no 5500 filings) are the eligible for a correction program or will they be subject to an excise tax? Any thoughts would be appreciated.
  17. Zorro1k
    When a plan does a dependent eligibility audit and does not receive supporting documentation it requests for participants it now assumes may not be covered, what are the rules for removing a covered person or their beneficiary? What documentation can a plan request?
  18. Zorro1k
    Thanks.
  19. Zorro1k
    I am a new JD and new to the field of employee benefits. I am enjoying the material so far and would like to improve my working knowledge of the vast regulations. There are two online LLM programs I am considering (Georgetown and John Marshall). Is this a valuable use of time and resources?
  20. Zorro1k

    LLM?

  21. Zorro1k
    It is SH profit sharing.
  22. Zorro1k
    Thanks for that. Where can I find the Q&A you referenced online?
  23. Zorro1k
    What if the plan is a safe harbor plan? The failure for 2014 would be a corrective amendment but the failure for 2015 would be a mid year amendment since there is not failure yet, would it not?
  24. Zorro1k
    I understand that the plan must be amended by that date. I'm wondering if a plan fails in 2014. Is the corrective amendment limited to 2014 only or can it be amended for 2014 and 2015 (the plan will be restated in 2016). I don't see anything prohibiting that but I don't know if anyone else has a different opinion.
  25. Zorro1k
    For 401 failures I don't see a limitation and I see guidance that repeated amendments are not preferred. I also see that those regulations that apply to 401 are generally applicable to 410 failures as well.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use

  I accept