Tom Poje

this might depend on your document provider. certainly some documents have a check box for salary and another one for bonuses, so it is possible. you are also correct, if you go that route, you must perform the 414s comp test to make sure its not discriminatory - if you fail that you have to test on total comp rather than comp less bonus. and the rule is comp less bonus and then cap at 245,000 if need be, not cap at 245000 and then reduce by bonus.

Last year's ASPPA Conference (2010) the following was asked Question: Required Minimum Distributions and Rehires - There does not appear to be guidance on how to handle required minimum distribution payments when an employee is rehired. For example, a 71-year old employee retires in 2010 and is rehired in 2012 at age 73. The employee had begun to receive RMD distributions, and now upon his rehire he would like to suspend payments until his ultimate retirement. Is it permissible to suspend his RMD payments, provided the plan document has language that so permits? IRS Response: No clear position in the regulations about what constitute retirement, and there is also not any guidance that permits stopping and restarting. Therefore, it appears that the circumstances at the initial retirement controls. (Page 6 of the handout, ASPPA doesn't appear to number them anymore)

you can either have each plan sign the SSA indiviudally and mail it in or you can file electronically. no signature required when filing electronically. there are 2 basic methods to file electronically: the FT Williams notes are as follows: Batch e-filing through the fulfillment service. This is the simplest way to file. The fulfillment process will allow you to submit a batch for e-filing with a few clicks of a button and you do not need to obtain a TCC Code for this feature. The fee is $x for the batch and Y for each plan itself. I found it reasonably priced. or E-file through the IRS FIRE system using a file created by ftwilliam.com. The Form 8955-SSAs may not be batched in the same way as 1099s for filing on FIRE. IRS requires that each Form 8955-SSA be filed separately on the FIRE site. As a result, if you need to file 200 Form 8955-SSAs you will need to upload 200 separate files to the FIRE site. Note: Even if you already have a TCC Code for the 1099s, you will have to apply for a new code specifically for the Form 8955-SSA.

I haven't changed anything, though I do have had a couple of version sitting on my system so I can't say 100% sure this is the exact same one. if there are any differences I think was simply in the formatting.

this is a possible file to pull the people for SSA. Since this year you can enter 2 years of info, the date range should be 1/1/2009 - 12/31/2010. (Obviously if your plan year is different you have to use the correct date range) I think because of the way I wrote things it misses people with DOT of 1/1/2009. later Tried adding a counter (of sorts) off to the side that only makes sense if running it over a 2 year period. even had success running it system wide on Relius (e.g. running 'all plans' under custom) I printed to file/ excel(data only) since I used FT William, I then copied the data I needed from that report into the file format needed by FT William and it worked like a charm. (of course, any such reports are use at your own risk, but this seemed to work fine)

I found the following from an ASPPA webcast. its a Wegesin-ism and that's just about as close to anything you can bet the farm on. IN-PLAN ROTH CONVERSIONS How are these reported on Form 5500? No reporting necessary inasmuch as no cash transferred in or out of the plan Is merely a re-characterization of existing funds for recordkeeping purposes Even though a taxable event has occurred I guess you would put the taxes under other expenses??? or as a loss?

according to the guru of gurus, the grand poo-bah of all poo-bahs and whatever titles, that is according to Janice Wegesin the DOL expects to make the forms available on I-File on or about December 20 (This year not next year if you are wondering). what timing, just about the first day of winter, the shortest day of the year, etc. how thoughtful.

my initial reaction would have been that's how its done but Publication 560 "What New" says its not a distribution. now what it means by 'most purposes' is your guess. In-plan Roth rollovers. Section 402A©(4) of the Internal Revenue Code provides for a distribution from an individual’s 401(k) plan, other than a designated Roth account, that is rolled over to the individual’s designated Roth account in the same plan. An in-plan Roth rollover is not treated as a distribution for most purposes. Section 402A©(4) was added by the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 and applies to distributions made after September 27, 2010. For additional guidance on in-plan Roth rollovers, see Notice 2010-84, 2010-51 I.R.B. 872, available at www.irs.gov/irb/2010-51_IRB/ar11. html.

well, IRC 411(6)© does say (ERISA 203 (b)(3)© says the same thing) years of service after such 5-year period shall NOT be required to be taken into account for purposes of determining the nonforfeitable percentage of his accrued benefit derived from employer contributions which accrued BEFORE such 5-year period. in other words, under the 5 year rule if the person had some vesting, then you have to count years of service, but only for future accruals not those that were BEFORE the break. (Unless I suppose you had a special document written that said everything would be restored)

probably, maybe, etc. remember, the 30 days notice is definitely okay. anything after that and the beginning of the plan year is starting to tread on whatever surface... for example, if the safe harbor is the 3%, then it has no effect on the persons decision to defer (most likely) so would probably never be considerd an issue. (in fact, if you hadn't given a notice at all, the IRS has informally said the correction is to provide the notice as soon as possible. (Supposedly, or at least rumor has it, the new EPCRS would provide information on safe harbor notice issues, but who knows when that will be released) if you have a safe harbor match then it might be considered a problem. the whole idea is that the IRS vies 30 days as giving a person enough time to make an informed decision.

and this reg cite will note that correction must be made within 9 1/2 months after the end of the plan year. that being said, I'd have other concerns. my old notes from CCH describes the 3 year cycle (you can only use this method if it is reasonablly expected there were no significant changes subsequent to the test) but now you say you expect the plan to fail this year. that sounds to me like there has been a possible significant change. what about last year? if you didn't test because you were relying on the 3 year cycle, but suspected there might be problems because of changes I think you have problems.(ok, as with anything in life, only if you get caught) Almost forgot I even had these notes stashed away. ugh, this goes back to 1992, but at least it talks about the three year cycle. Its Announcement 92-117, IRB 1992-33,21 August 17, 1992I see I made a notation on these notes many years, also indicating under certain condition you'd have to bump the 70% to 77% just to be on the 'safe side'. since I've never done 3 year testing I never bothered with, but it's there stuck in the back of my mind.

"antiquated method " - luv it! I was inspired by such comments about the grumblings of E-Fast2, last year ended up writing a version of "Ah, do you remeber these". (third verse sounds just like your comments.) attached a music file, you can hum along, though you have to rename the file from .xls to .mid but its the only way I could figure out how to attach the tune. guess that shows my 'antiquated age', this song goes back to the early - mid 70's as I recall. was in high school. Statler Bros. 10 year cliffs, class year plans, and the rule of 45, Five to fifteen year vesting really made those plans alive Laid off just before you’d vest, but that’s the way it goes- Ah, do you remember those? No EGTRRA, no USERRA and what the heck is GUST? No top heavy requirement was placed upon the Trust No self-direction, default funds and why disclose the fees Ah do you remember these Fifty-five hundred C or R, there’s No e-file 2 hand filled forms sent in by mail, that’s all that we need do And we filled out many forms, the Schedule Ts and Ps Ah do you remember these HCEs and the 1/3rd rule, the multiple use test PIA offset DB plans, they seemed like the best No Cash Balance, no DB-K, nothing like an E-Bar Can you remember back that far? No catch up limits, Roth deferrals, EPCRS Things were easier back then, but now we’ve got a mess Segment rates and funding yield curves have added to our woes Ah, if we could forget those SIMPLE plans, and SHNECS and SHMACs, New Comparability Way back when those things were not part of reality no nondisrim, no 410-b, we didn’t dream of GATT, ah do you remember that? Combo plans had 415-e rules to think about the1.25 multiplier was often left in doubt and owners could not take a loan, even if they did say please ah, do you remember these? 30 thou was the limit; 25 percent of pay comp reduced by deferrals, for us that was ok for us old folks, those were the rules, they were our ABCs Do we, do we remember these? Yes, we do, Ahh how we remember these!

yes, at least based on 1.410(b)-5(e)(3) that appears to be permissible. I suppose logically that would make sense. If A passes and B passes the even if you combined A + B it would end up passing.

but since the DOL said attach them as a pdf, I'm not sure what they are going to expect. there are no bar codes, and I vaguely recall having seen froms like that hand filled out, so I think I would think that would be acceptable.

instead of this folder, check the folder Retirement Plans in General even attached a spreadsheet with the current estimates

this should be the one of the easiest things you do. you simply go the DOL website http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq-EFAST2.html see Q 4... For example, if you are filing a delinquent 2007 Form 5500 return/report for a defined benefit pension plan, you must include the 2007 Schedule B, Schedule R and all required attachments for these schedules. Attach them as pdf images to the current filing year Form 5500 (2010 forms should be used as current filing year forms as of 1/1/2011), tagging them as "other attachments." To obtain correct-year schedules and related instructions, go to this listing and print the schedules and instructions of the form year that corresponds to the plan year for which you are filing. by clicking on "this listing" you should be able to obtain the froms you need. ok, they only go back to 1995, if you have to go farther back then that I have no idea what you would do. Panic, jump off a building or something. (lucky I even noticed this. Since I don't do DBs I rarely look here, but the topic title suckered me in)

see also point 3 at http://www.relius.net/News/TechnicalUpdates.aspx?ID=433

my 'estimates' are only based on what the code / regs say. years ago I explained how it works to someone and he gave me an excel sheet using the logic. I came out ahead on the deal! simply plug in the CPI-U values and the results are there. I've posted the file before. this is the most current, with June - July - Aug, just to get an idea where things stand. According to an ASPPA e-mail a meeting is taking place today. Judy Miller, ASPPA's Chief of Actuarial Issues & Director of Retirement Policy, will testify in defense of 401(k) plans before the Senate Finance Committee tomorrow morning, Thursday, September 15 at 10:00 a.m. ET. As you know, we are very concerned about serious congressional proposals to slash contribution limits or turn the current year's exclusion into a credit. These proposals are aimed at paying down the current debt, but proposals like these would discourage small business owners from setting up or maintaining workplace retirement plans, jeopardizing the retirement future of America's workers at a time already plagued with economic uncertainty. There are multiple ways to view tomorrow's testimony: A live video stream of the hearing will be accessible via the Senate Finance Committee website starting at 10:00 a.m. ET; The same webpage will feature an archived version later in the day; and The ASPPA Newsroom will provide coverage, including transcripts, video and photos throughout the day.

the CPI-U value released today was 226.545. If it stays the same next month (or even drops slightly - around 226.2) then based on the current regs, HCE will jump to 115,000 of course all this assumes that the folks in Washington won't reset everything back to the dark ages so they can have more tax money. that of course will mean less savings, so then when people retire the govt will have to spend even more $.

here are the examples from the ERISA Outline Book 2008 edition by Sal Tripodi. well worth the investment just for some of the examples alone. (asuming of course the author is correct, which I find to be true in most cases. see especially the last sentence of the first example.) chapter 4, section VI Part A 2.e.Cash-out has no effect on vesting rights. A cash-out distribution does not affect a participant's service for vesting purposes. The crediting rules and break and service rules discussed in Part C of Section V control the determination of a participant's vesting percentage. 2.e.1)Example. A profit sharing plan uses the 6-year graded vesting schedule. Melissa has 4 years of service for vesting purposes and is 60% vested. Following her termination of employment, she receives a cash-out distribution in 2007 of $6,000, representing her vested interest. The remaining $4,000 is forfeited. In 2009, Melissa returns to employment and does not repay the distribution. For the plan year ending December 31, 2009, Melissa's account is credited with an employer contribution of $2,000. Melissa incurred a break in service in 2008. In 2009 she is credited with at least 1,000 hours of service. Even if the plan uses the one-year break in service rule described in Part C.1. of Section V of this chapter, Melissa's prior years of service must be re-credited because she has earned another year of service. As of December 31, 2009, she has 5 years of vesting service and is 80% vested. The fact Melissa received a cash-out distribution does not affect this vesting computation. The conclusion would be the same even if Melissa does not return to employment until after a 5-year break in service period, when she no longer has the right to restore her pre-break forfeiture by repaying her previous cash-out distribution. 2.e.2)Example. Assume in the prior example that Melissa repays her cash-out distribution during 2009. As of December 31, 2009, Melissa's account balance is $12,000, reflecting the repayment of the cash-out distribution ($6,000), the restoration of the prior forfeiture ($4,000) and the new employer contribution ($2,000). The 80% vesting applies to the entire amount. Remember, the only break in service rule that would prevent Melissa from increasing her vesting in her pre-break account balance ($10,000), is the 5-year break in service rule. Melissa only incurred one break in service. This example illustrates the advantage to the employee of repaying the cash-out distribution. By having the forfeiture restored, Melissa is able to increase vesting in an amount that was once forfeited.

The ERISA Outline Book summed it up as follows 2008 edition, Chapter 2 Section V Part C 2.d.Partially-vested participant. Note that once a participant becomes even partially vested (e.g., 20% vested under the plan's vesting schedule), there is no break in service rule that will permanently disregard his prior service for eligibility purposes. If a partially-vested participant incurs a break in service, the only rule that may apply is the one-year holdout rule discussed in 1. above, under which it is possible to get the prior service re-credited. In fact, the one-year holdout rule would apply even to a 100% vested participant who incurs a break in service.

At the 2010 ASPPA conference the IRS answered the question this way: Does the rule of parity for vesting permit the disregarding of years of service for a rehired participant who was nonvested at termination in employer contributions but had salary deferrals? What about someone who made no deferrals but could have? If there is a vested amount, prior service cannot be disregarded, even if the vested account is attributable to deferrals. IRC 411(a)(6)© and (D). However, if there is a vested percentage, but no vested amount (i.e., no deferrals made in this example), the rule of parity does permit prior service to be disregarded.

I e-mailed efast2@efast.dol.gov and the response was Unfortunately, it is possible for a filing author to mistakenly enter an EIN incorrectly. If a filing author has entered an incorrect EIN that matches the EIN of another company, the other company will see the affected filings on the "Submissions" page of the EFAST website. There is currently no method to remove the mistaken filings from the Submissions page list. I was hoping the reponse would be something like: ok, we will contact these folks and have them correct their 5500. oh well.

ok, so doing a takeover case. went out to the DOL website to pull last year's 5500 (there are 2 plans) but wait, there are 3 out there from 2009, one with a completely different name. looked that name up on FreeErisa, and its there for 2008 and 2009, but also there in 2004 under a different EIN (beginning 54- instead of 59-) ooops. someone has filed under the wrong number. oh, look at the 2009 filing. I see it wasn't signed until 1/21/2011 so that was late. oh, and it has late deferrals listed. the things you stumble across.

so if the IRS comes back and says "You are not supposed to include the D people" then simply ask them "How can you file electronically?"