matth100

Thanks for the reply. Where I was going with this is that while there is control due to the common ownership, and while payroll is run by the same S Corp... My thought/hope was that it would mean that we did not have to cover the Nanny (unless that was desired).

"Get a ROBS" is the official IRS definition Sorry for the confusion... I think that Karoline may have identified the issue, but also, it might make it possible if so.... Existing k has a loan. If the plan is terminated then the loan will default. However, I'd like the client to be able to access k funds since he has no other available assets and needs some cash to keep afloat. I felt that a ROBS k would be a good option here, but we can't just close up the old plan and roll it, we would need to either find a way to amend the plan into a ROBS plan (my question) or if it would be possible to partially roll out from the old plan, leaving the loan intact, so it doesn't trigger default....? I'm looking for this to be done by someone, for both plan paperwork and TPA, if it is possible to be done.

Wondering if there might be a way to get a ROBS 401(k) from an existing Individual 401(k) that also has a loan attached. TP doesn't have the cashflow to pay off the loan now, so doesn't want to risk termination of that aspect. If anyone is familiar and drafts documents for this, please let me know thoughts and prices.

I was thinking about that, but figured that with a custodian change they might not be able to do so, I'll ask, thanks.

Wondering how we might address an over contribution to a SEP IRA if it has since closed and the funds transferred into a 401(k). 2016 tax year, looks like about $2K over the limit was added to the SEP, but a withdrawal doesn't seem possible since the account has since transferred into an Individual 401(k) Any ideas on how to resolve this?

I agree with you 100%. I only do them as a courtesy to other service providers I do business with. They do not actually generate revenue, and the client needs a lot more hand holding. Me too!

But to use your painting analogy, might not be able to afford (in a practical sense) a TPA to have access to a Solo K. My painting was not an analogy, it was a real situation for me. My virus protection comment was an analogy used to illustrate the point. The reason I even bothered to comment on this post is because over the past 10 years I've been aggressively correcting financial advisors who were quick to suggest that there was no need for a TPA simply because it was a one-person plan. This was a mindset that carried over from the old Keogh days. Back then, you mainly had a single source of funding in the plan. Nowadays, you have several sources of funds; each with their own rules. Books can be written on the potential failures. I think the most appropriate analogy would be purchasing a Mercedes Benz and not being able to afford the insurance premium. The easy argument is that if you cannot afford the insurance premium, then that would question whether or not you can really afford the Mercedes. I understand that each case is difference, but the idea of cutting corners and trying to make it seem 'practical' has been proven disastrous on many occasions. I've even explained to advisors why $12,500 in a SIMPLE IRA is better than $18,000 in a solo(k) plan. The main reason is that in a SIMPLE IRA, you don't need a TPA. In a solo(k) plan, the $300 fee that you quote is really for the additional $5,500 in contributions you are getting; and that amount is even reduced by the 3% employer contributions on top of the deferrals. Good Luck! Thanks for the advice.

I have a good grasp of compensation and will be setting up their payroll and deductions. Clients will be on W2 comp. Plan document is off the shelf 'Prototype' I wouldn't seek to build anything custom. I'm looking seriously at the QPA cert, I spoke with the ASPPA last week and they advised me to wait until Jan when the RPF 1 and 2 switch to a modular format. Thanks again for the help.

Matt, the point you are missing (or perhaps simply overlooking) is that a client who cant afford a few hundred a year on competent and qualified advice should probably look for savings vehicle more in line with what they can afford. And honestly, if you are putting away $18k+ a year, it is not that you cant afford it, you are simply too cheap for your own good. This isn't Michelangelo vs a handyman for a tree house, this is hiring a librarian to your electric work. Sure she may have read up on how to draw wires and how to ground, but there is a good chance she will burn your house down. On a side note, I'm not sure what ethical standards you are held to, but most professionals in this forum are held to circular 230 or higher, and providing services for something you are not qualified for would be a big no no. Something to consider. Well, I see it a little differently regarding cost. For example, the Mutual Fund industry could say the same: "If you can't afford 1.5% fee then you shouldn't be invested in the market" but in reality there is an ETF out there for 0.04% that does a better job for a lower price. Note that I'm not suggesting that I could do a better job at all than a TPA, just using a correlation between the concepts of pricing, and active vs passive management. Regarding the ethical standards, that is a good point. And circling back to my original line of questioning, in addition to what sort of recordkeeping requirements are needed for a SoloK, to address your question directly: What qualifications are required to send through a prototype SoloK and ensure that the client doesn't go over their limits/do anything out of bounds? Is a certification such as the QKA, QPA, CPC, ERSA, etc a qualification, and is it required by law to do what I'm talking about here?

Just to be very clear - I've never thought or said that the TPA isn't worth much, I think very highly of the profession and the qualifications. But to use your painting analogy, I wouldn't hire Michelangelo to paint my tree house. Would he (if he were still around) do a great job? Undoubtedly, but the value of the house just wouldn't justify the expense of hiring him. Saying I wouldn't want to hire him isn't a judgement on his skill, competence or years of training. I'm just trying to find a way to get people who might not be able to afford (in a practical sense) a TPA to have access to a Solo K.

I like basic questions - thanks for the answer So if all we are doing is delaying the RMD a couple of years and not offering any other value, the return doesn't seem to be overly great in relation to the added complication and potential risk. Is there any other value add that the vesting option, if possible, would offer?

Question related to the value such vesting would offer to the plan participant: if they did not incorporate this clause then they would have to start RMDs after 70 1/2 even if still working - would they be able to both contribute and RMD in conjunction in this scenario? If so, the lost opportunity from the delayed RMD likely isn't much in a single participant plan?

That's actually really neat... but just thinking, if the owner should die before they are vested, what would happen to the ER side?

Do they get fries with that? Thanks for adding value to the discussion. No offense was intended. I think that hidden within this statement is really the underlying aspect of this whole discussion. What is the perceived value of something? For some, my original post may have been of value because it added some levity to the conversation. For others, it may have added value to the discussion by highlighting the possible dichotomy of being able to provide services that include everything while seeking for insight on some fairly routine procedures for pension professionals. For still others, it added no value because it did not address a desired question or was perceived as a belittling comment. Similarly, some may see little value in paying fees for certain services because they prefer to the take the associated risks or assume little or no risk will exist. Others see a greater value in paying the fees to a seasoned professional due to the peace of mind they will have. To each his own. Sorry about that - I've done extensive research and nothing had led me to believe that TPAs had a sense of humor I personally don't see a dichotomy here. If the answer is routine and straightforward, why not share it rather than put up walls? I'm not sure I want to go through the entire QPA course just to discover that it was actually pretty straightforward all along!

I asked the provider of the docs and they said they took care of this, any updates are filed appropriately and both the participant and myself would be advised of any changes. Not exactly the case - I was asking (sorry for not being clear) if I run it on a custodial platform what additional measures should I take to ensure that it is all running properly. What I've noticed is that some providers (EG Vanguard) split the transactions into EE/ER at time of contribution whereas others (TD Ameritrade) do not. I just wanted to make sure that if we were with a custodian like TD (using their model prototype plan that they update) that contributions were tracked properly.