RatherBeGolfing

The 401k plan cant be effective 1/1/24. The transition year (the 401k portion of the year) has to begin on the day following the termination date of the SIMPLE, and end on the last day of the calendar year during which termination starts.

The question is whether the plan satisfies coverage and nondiscrimination by permissive aggregation. If there was no aggregation, the answer is no. From the instructions:

It takes the IRS a long time to process under normal circumstances. They are still very backlogged, so I would expect a few months minimum. The penalty/interest letters are autogenerated, so they will continue until resolved in the IRS system. If you want to make sure your stuff has been received and is in line for processing, call the IRS number on the late notice and speak to an IRS rep. Be prepared to donate a kidney for ID verification... Just kidding of course, but they may ask you questions like a number from your last tax return to prove that you are you.

Enjoy retirement Andy! You have earned it! I will also echo the appreciation for Dave, Lois and this forum . It is such a great resource for this community and I always enjoy meeting my fellow benefitslinkers in the wild!

@justanotheradmin thanks for the update. This makes a lot more sense.

Oh Lord are they giving us a new Form to file as well!?! 😏

This is correct. Starting 2023, it changes from eligible participants to participants with an account balance to determine the count for the audit trigger. Other than that, no changes.

Agreed. I don't see a problem with pushing a service provider to see the error of their ways, but public shaming is not the way.

They are clearly incorrect. The instructions to the 2023 5500-SF states that participant includes those ELIGIBLE TO DEFER It also differentiates total participants and participants with a balance. If the instructions say that participant with a balance in 5(c) are those participants from 5(a) with a balance, it also follows that 5(a) includes those WITHOUT a balance, because otherwise 5(c) isn't needed. This isn't rocket surgery, I would push for answers from someone higher up. If they are only counting Ps with balances for 5(a), they are clearly wrong.

Pfffft, I could listen to Derrin all day every day! 🤡

We are special. Pensions/retirement is one of very few areas where there is some bi-partisan support. And as @david rigby says, if you want to be re-elected, you have to show you are doing something, right?

It never hurts to develop a relationship with your members of congress. They work for YOU, and if they have a good staff they will also want to develop that relationship. You can also volunteer for Government Affairs Committees for the various industry organizations you may belong to. I know a lot of people here on the boards are already involved, but they are almost always looking for new members. Participating in industry PACs is also helpful.

I have no problem with change, increasing coverage, and so on. The problem is that we are making huge changes on an almost year by year basis at this point. Major changes like LTPT or lowering the statutory age maximum from 21 to 18 cant drop year after with a very limited time until its effective. We need time for major changes or chaos is all but guaranteed.

SECURE 3.0. I do like the Roth IRA to Roth 401k rollover possibility though...

I for one look forward to seeing the exhibits Austin will use in front of Congress... Can you say Groovy Baby! And Brians direct dial is 867-5309... Ill see myself out now.

I wish... I have high hopes for SECURE 3.0 though!

Just don't file it late if you were not required to file. I have dealt with far too many late EZs over the years. The IRS does not care that you were not required to file, if you file late you will have to pay the penalty or correction program user fee.

Some. Others were "I was just at the Dr. Acula conference and in one session...", or "Forbes/WSJ just had this article..."

"Dad, I don't care that the IRS dropped a new rule, can't I just eat my happy meal and build my lego's?!?!" happens way too often...

I think we can add Kelsey Mayo to that list as well. I have a very short list of trusted sources (Brad Pitt is on the list) on this topic. We should all be very careful with articles/blogs aimed at a wide audience, as they tend to skip some of the more technical issues that are too complicated for a wide audience. You could easily spend an entire article just discussing the "shift to plan year" issue, and many non-industry readers still wouldn't understand it.

The many articles floating around have created quite the issue. They had people convinced that the first LTPTs would enter on 1/1/24 when the first LTPTs could have entered as early as February 2023 (I suppose January 2023 could be possible but I haven't seen an example). Oversimplification and lack of guidance until late 2023 was a bad combination.

Aaaaaaaaaaand get ready for a tsunami of questions on match and non-elective contributions as Roth....

Happy holidays @Belgarath!

We need a "go directly to ERISA Attorney, do not pass go, do not collect $200" card for these situations...

This is really a possibility for any plan today. Look at the forfeiture usage lawsuits where plans are doing something that is permitted by most pre-approved plan docs.