CuseFan

Also, I suggest talking with your accountant or financial adviser. If the value of the stock has appreciated significantly over the years, you could reap some significant tax benefits by taking your distribution in shares of stock rather than "cashing out" and/or rolling over.

As a 403(b), only ACP testing would be a concern, but I agree that providing a match only to a subset of participants could not be a safe harbor match. They would have to physically have a new/separate plan for new hires (and pass coverage).

In these gray areas we are providing clients with the PBGC criteria and asking them to either make their own determination (who knows their business better?) or to request a determination of coverage from PBGC. However, if there isn't an existing DBP, then PBGC won't rule, and if the question of coverage is one of the decision criteria in whether or not to adopt a plan, potential sponsors and their providers are left making educated guesses. If you're looking for an educated guess here, my opinion is that a licensed speech therapist would be professional services.

If the plans are aggregated for nondiscrimination (and coverage) to enable the CBP to pass, and the contributions required in the DCP to pass the NDT are not made, then it is the CBP that fails 401(a)(4) nondiscrimination and w/o correction would be disqualified. The DCP would not be DQ'd on its own if there is no discretionary PS contribution because that plan does not need to be aggregated. However, if there is a SH and/or other type of contribution required under the terms of the plan and not made then that is a qualification issue. Note that not making the CB contribution does not mean that the plan defined contribution credits do not get allocated - so there's no "out" here by claiming HCEs didn't get any allocation/benefit.

code 2 is for exceptions so yes, i would think so

ok, so attach Sched A and report properly, why the reluctance?

Here's some other potential issues: IRS may still insist on those missed RMDs being taken from the IRA even if they waive the excise taxes. If they don't require that correction and accept the payments from PS as IRA RMDs, the question is whether the PS distributions were enough to cover both. That is, did a prior year IRA RMD amount paid from PS reduce the PS balance used to determine a subsequent year PS RMD?

unless it would otherwise qualify for EZ (owners/spouses only) filing, you have a filing requirement regardless of asset size. and if it would qualify for EZ filing, you have a filing requirement due to asset size.

Austin, is there a question here? Y and Z are not a CG, as you note. As they are not service organizations, I don't think there is an ASG either. Or is there another question?

Which instructions? I just pulled this from 2016 5500-EZ instructions. Who Does Not Have To File Form 5500-EZ You do not have to file Form 5500-EZ for the 2016 plan year for a one-participant plan if the total of the plan's assets and the assets of all other one-participant plans maintained by the employer at the end of the 2016 plan year does not exceed $250,000, unless 2016 is the final plan year of the plan. For more information on final plan years, see Final Return later. Clearly you have to file for the CBP. And if these are not owner-only plans it doesn't matter what the assets are, you have a filing requirement.

By "owner" do you mean of the business? So RMDs were required from both PSP and IRA - but only taken from PSP? Echoing the above - no "correction protocol" for IRA except to take out the missed RMDs and pay the excise tax. It MAY be possible to petition the IRS to get them to waive the excise tax if this person took enough from the PSP to cover both, so the right taxes were ultimately paid for those years, but I have no experience with IRS in this area and don't know if they're reasonableness/sympathy extends to IRA compliance.

even IRS would have to admit the differences are immaterial

TIAA-CREF not performing any function related to plan compliance is par for the course from what I've seen over the years.

Exactly, same as deciding whether to offer loans, hardship withdrawals, etc.

Is this really a "leased employee" type of arrangement? The "employer" does not seem to be in the employee leasing business. Also, just because the contract says X is the employer does not necessarily mean that it is the sole employer, and that A, B and C are not also employers of these employees. It seems more like a shared employee situation. I think Darrin Watson has addressed shared his thoughts on employee sharing - I would try handy dandy Google.

Check to be delivered by Jason Vorhees of the Crystal Lake post office?

Exactly. Although 4/1/2018 is her RBD, 2017 is her first distribution calendar year. This is a qualification requirement/issue for the plan so there are no options on this.

The document should be very specific about that - whether pre-tax salary and 125 deferrals are included or not. If you have an adoption agreement, it might be a check box or you may have to go to the basic document. Even an individually designed plan is supposed to specify that. Very rarely have I seen a plan compensation definition (for allocation purposes) that excludes those items.

Why can't the excess be distributed from the 401(k)? It was ineligible to be in the SEP so it was not eligible for rollover. Just like rolling over excess amounts from a plan to an IRA, where you have to withdraw from the IRA to correct, what makes this different?

Amen

I have seen plans that say if the participant has made a valid election for an optional form but dies prior to the ASD that the election is honored, or the actuarial equivalent of the benefit (100%) gets paid - but most plans say if the participant dies before benefits commence (i.e., ASD) that the QPSA rules apply, which would nullify any elections that may have been made. The waiver is specifically for the QJSA, so pre-retirement spousal rights are not waived/consented. If a spouse signed a consent to a QPSA waiver and then the participant retired shortly thereafter they would still need to execute QJSA waiver/consent for something other than the J&S. Unless the plan explicitly says differently, i think the QPSA provisions trump the participant elections if (s)he does not survive to the ASD.

are you searching for a unicorn here? i hope not, good luck!

yes, on 12/31/2018. the 2017 in-service should not include any RMD since still working

Love the conversation here! Let's try another context - different but similar. HCE has excess deferrals and/or match in 2016 due to failed ADP and/or ACP test. HCE dies in January 2017 before testing is done and corrective distribution determined. Plan pays corrective distribution in March to who? Estate or death benefit beneficiary? Again, a required corrective distribution and not a death benefit - who gets it? Let the arguments commence! (What better to do on a Friday afternoon? Certainly not 5500s!)

i guess their thought was that the surviving spouse would get the (100%) lump sum so the QPSA is satisfied - which may be true, although when does someone designate a beneficiary for a lump sum? - and their opinion is that the spouse already signed off. However, that waiver was for the QJSA, not the QPSA, and I also think the plan is then paying out more than it should. Thanks for your input.