Tom

A plan was required to be audited in the past but no audit required now since the # of account holders dropped just below 100 as of 1/1/2023 and 1/1/2024. Looking ahead to 2025 - what if the account holders go to 105 as of 1/1/2025? I'm reading that the plan can file as per the prior year if between 80 and 120 account holders. So in this case the plan could file 5500-SF for and no audit for the 2025 plan year? Filing the 5500 wrong certainly has bad consequence which is why I'm asking. Thank you.

Participant has passed and spouse passed some years ago. We believe 3 adult children are beneficiaries. Question - I imagine the beneficiaries will need to waive the annuity as the default distribution option just as the participant would if he had lived and elected to roll to an IRA? Thank you

We file one 5500 for a 403(b) plan. It is long frozen. I asked for their IRS Opinion letter. They provided me one with an approval date of 8/7/2017. This does not seem current. Does anyone know? I requested this from the plan sponsor. But I believe I need to tell them to contact TIAA to make sure this is the most recent. Thank you, Tom

We file one 403(b) 5500. It is a TIAA 403(b) plan document. I assume the plan sponsor should have a copy of the Opinion Letter for 5500 purposes? Thanks

We have a situation whereby the client is attempting to get information to us about a potential first time 5500 filing. We could file an extension to be on the safe side. Is there a problem with then not filing the 5500 if it ends up there is no filing requirement? I know we could file one anyway but this could go on for years when it wouldn't have to. Thanks

Great question ESOP guy! When you get close to retirement (a year or two) I don't want anything to blow up.

In the past we mailed our forms in several batches of say 50 each, with "return receipt requested" whereby the IRS signs a card and returns. We've never had a problem but I'm rethinking this for the 2023 forms. Do you recommend sending them overnight delivery for example? I'm tempted to send the forms in twice - the old way and also overnight delivery to make sure they are received. Getting them twice should not be an issue I wouldn't think. We have fewer this year - maybe 75 total but I want zero risk that 75 plans would be considered filed late because of no Form 5558. Would be a nightmare! Thank you for any ideas. Heck I'd hand delivery them to the IRS at the federal building if I thought I could. Tom

We unfortunately file 2 WB 5500s for large clients - out of necessity from years ago. They have pretax cafeteria insurances covered under the 5500. We file the 5500 as one filing covering all the benefits. We provided a cafeteria plan document listing the insurance benefits. Their new benefits broker is taking this over (thankfully) and are asking for a wrap document. One does not exist that we can see. There is an Summary that looks like a SPD that someone produced some years ago but they tell me that is not an SPD. It has a summary of each benefit structure, eligibility, benefits, etc. That led us to believe they had a wrap document. The issue now is for them to draft the wrap document now and move on, or amend past 5500s and file for each benefit structure since there was no wrap document. Problem there of course is - filing 5500s as "new" for 3 years ago will be late and DFVC will apply. Going forward without amendment/filing separate they say carries risk of not being in compliance by not having a wrap document. Comments? Thank you.

Sometimes we don't know if there is anyone to report on Form 8955 by July 31 and so we file for extension of 5500 and 8955. Is there a problem if we file for extension and then the IRS does not receive an 8955 filing? I'm wondering if we can file 8955 with no participants listed, but I'm guessing the software might block the filing. Thank you.

Correction to my math. LLC(3) has 6 eligible so 22/28 78%+ coverage assuming LLC(3) does not participate in the plan. Fairly safe coverage ratio.

Dentist Sue owns 100% of LLC(1) and dentist Bill works PT for this LLC. 14 eligible covered employees in Sue's LLC(1) plan. Dentist Sue and Bill purchase a practice about 10 miles away, they form LLC(2) with Sue owning 80% and Bill 19%. I assume they will both see patients at both locations. LLC(2) will co-sponsor Sue's LLC(1) existing 401(k) plan. This will add 8 covered employees for then a total of 22. Dentist Bill also owns 100% of dental practice LLC(3) 15-20 miles away. Sue has no ownership, nor does she work there. LLC(3) has no 401(k) plan. They are asking if they must cover these employees in the plan shared by LLC(1) and (2). The easy answer is 22/30 covered = 73%. Assuming my estimated coverage is correct, LLC(3) need not be covered. I realiz this will have to be carefully reviewed every year. But, does anyone see an ASG here? I don't believe there will be any association of patients between LLC(2) and (3) for dentist Bill. The practices are distant enough, patients won't associate one with the other. Does that seem reasonable? Thank you!

I had actually l read that article the other day which prompted my question. The last sentence of the paragraph below applies to the type of plans in the bolded paragraph heading, not to all plans. That's always been my understanding. But when I read this, I misunderstood the contest of that sentence and made it too broad. Thanks for the clarification. It just seems counterintuitive that a spouse must be the beneficiary (if not waived) but the participant can take distributions without spousal consent for plans without the QJSA/QPSA requirement.

Assume there is a 401(k) that does not provide for QJSA/QPSA as the plan contains no contribution sources requiring such nor does the plan include the annuity options electively. A 401(k) plan primary beneficiary must be the spouse unless the spouse consents to an alternative. Assume the participant wishes to take in in-service distribution. Do TPAs typically look up the beneficiary before approving a distribution to confirm the spouse is the primary beneficiary or that the spouse consented to an alternative? If a non-spouse was named without spousal consent, then that would be in invalid designation and the spouse would remain primary beneficiary. So it would seem distributions can be approved without reviewing beneficiary designations?

We were asked to prepare Form 5500 for a long-ago frozen 403(b) plan for a small group of nuns. We filed the 2022 5500 but the 8955 never crossed my mind like it does for all our 401(k) plans. The nuns ran an organic farm. It stopped operations long ago and they are all very elderly. So I supposed they terminated employment and probably would/should have been reported on 8955 some years back. Not knowing if they have been we could report them now for 2023. Thoughts? Thank you

We have a small plan whereby each participant has a separate broker account. We directed the financial advisor to deposit into each person's account their 2022 employer contribution in Sept 2023 and actually again in Feb 2024. It did not get done until May 2024. The contribution was made to the plan on time for tax purposes - deposited into a general fund plan .account. The financial advisor has agreed to deposit lost earnings. The FA is now getting into areas that in my opinion they should not -asking us if Form 5330 is needed and if the 2023 5500 needs to be amended to reflect the earnings receivable. I do not see anyway to report this on Form 5330. The employer did not benefit so it is not a prohibited transaction. As for the 5500, I lean toward just showing the earnings on the 2024 5500 since that is when they will be deposited. I suppose we could split our calculation between Oct 1 and Dec 31, 2023 and show that as a receivable and amend the 5500 but that seems unnecessary. It is filed on an accrual basis since we add in the employer 2023 contribution receivable even though not paid until 2024. Thoughts?