C. B. Zeller
Senior Contributor-
Posts
1,905 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
211
Everything posted by C. B. Zeller
-
Adding SH to plan mid-year, any good resources
C. B. Zeller replied to BG5150's topic in 401(k) Plans
The mid-year/retroactive safe harbor non-elective is only good for the ADP safe harbor. If you need the ACP safe harbor for a discretionary match, then you will have to wait until the next plan year. Since you mentioned you have access to ERISApedia, chapter 14.12 has a great discussion on safe harbor plans. In particular there is a chart in 14.12.3.5 that I think will help you narrow it down. Remember that the notice has to be given before the beginning of the year, so if a notice is required then you can't make the change mid-year. -
Adding SH to plan mid-year, any good resources
C. B. Zeller replied to BG5150's topic in 401(k) Plans
Safe harbor match can't be added mid-year. Safe harbor non-elective can be added up through November 30 (assuming calendar year plan) of the current year at 3%, or up through December 31 of the following year (i.e. 12/31/2027) at 4%. -
I disagree with Marjorie Lucas (who I suspect might be an LLM, based on the responses posted above). The employee enters the plan immediately upon rehire. You can not disregard prior service merely because the plan was frozen at the time, or because there was no plan in effect at the time. Requiring him to work another 1000 hours before entering the plan would violate the maximum service requirement of IRC 410(a)/ERISA 202.
-
Google Workspace and Microsoft 365 are the big cloud-based products. Protonmail, based in Switzerland, has a security-first product, but they are not as full-featured as Microsoft or Google. If you are using your own domain name, it can be complicated to get your email up and running without professional help. Besides configuring your MX records for the new email host, you will also need to make sure SPF, DKIM and DMARC are configured correctly to ensure your outbound email gets delivered and not flagged as spam on the receiving end. Good luck!
-
Yes, they have to. Unless the assets are less than $250k, in which case, they don't have a filing requirement at all.
-
If the plan covers only a 100% owner and their spouse, then they should be filing a 5500-EZ, not SF.
-
FT William 401k Discretionary Match
C. B. Zeller replied to austin3515's topic in Operating a TPA or Consulting Firm
Is it? I don't see anything in the text of that item or the items above or below it that would restrict it to the YOS match formula. There is the heading of course, but as it says in the basic document, headings are for reference and convenience only, and are not part of the plan document. It seems to me more likely that the coders at FTW put this item in the wrong place. You could always select "Special schedule" in D.8.f and describe it there. Something along the lines of, "a uniform percentage of Matched Employee Contributions not in excess of X% of Compensation" -
FT William 401k Discretionary Match
C. B. Zeller replied to austin3515's topic in Operating a TPA or Consulting Firm
Looks like it's at D.11.b in my adoption agreement. It's under the heading "Years of Service" which doesn't make much sense to me, but so be it. -
Not Sure If Anything Can Be Done Here
C. B. Zeller replied to Dougsbpc's topic in Correction of Plan Defects
Whoops. Missed that part. Then I agree with Bri, it's still a deferral election, it's merely late. -
Not Sure If Anything Can Be Done Here
C. B. Zeller replied to Dougsbpc's topic in Correction of Plan Defects
Not even late. For an owner with earned income, they have until their tax return is finalized to deposit their deferrals. For a sole prop that can be as late as 4/15, or even later on extension. I would have no problem saying that the establishment of an auto-$2k/month withdrawal constitues an election to defer $24k for the year. So just get the remaining money in by 4/15 and call it a day. -
You only need to test them all together as one big group. Under 414(b), members of a controlled group are treated as a single employer for testing purposes. So if A, B, and C are all the same employer, and C, D, and E are all the same employer, then logically all of A, B, C, D and E must be the same employer.
-
Peter's info (as he is clear to remind us, not advice) is thorough and excellent as always. It sounds like the client is happy with the current tax situation, and ejohnke is just looking to correct the potential disqualifying defect of allowing a distribution that shouldn't have happened. Is that accurate? If the individual could have had a distributable event, but the plan didn't allow the distribution, could the plan be retroactively amended to permit it? For example, the participant is 60 years old, so amend the plan retroactively to 2025 to permit in-service distributions at age 59-1/2. Problem solved. If there really is no possible distributable event (don't forget that employer money sources can have much more liberal distribution restrictions than 401(k) deferrals), then you might still be able to get relief for the distribution (and leave the money in the Roth IRA) through VCP.
-
Plan termination - when can distributions be made
C. B. Zeller replied to Santo Gold's topic in Plan Terminations
Stock sale or asset sale? If asset sale: A still exists as a shell company and the owner(s) of A can sign on behalf of A. The participants can take distributions right after the sale date since they are no longer employees of A. If stock sale: B is now the sponsor of The Company A 401(k) Plan and has the authority to sign. Participants can not take a distribution until the plan termination date. Termination triggers the successor plan rule and B may not be allowed to maintain a 401(k) plan for 1 year after the distribution date. This is why, with a stock sale, it is important to terminate the seller's plan before the sale date, or be prepared to merge the plans. -
Can a Roth Catch-up be deposited to a Roth IRA rollover
C. B. Zeller replied to Renee H's topic in 401(k) Plans
An IRA can not be part of a qualified plan. A Roth IRA can not be rolled over into a Roth account in a qualified plan. Just set up the new account. Do it right. -
Glad to hear it's working out well for you. In my experience, I've never seen the IRS try to bring the hammer down on someone who was demonstrably making an honest effort to comply. They are pretty lenient with waiving penalties as long as you can show you were trying.
-
To satisfy the RMD in a DB plan, the participant must commence distribution of their entire accrued benefit no later than the RBD. What does the plan document say about the available forms of benefit? I suspect it offers a few annuity options, with monthly or annual frequency. The participant would need to elect one of the available forms of benefit and commence distribution under the selected form. Conversion of the accrued benefit to the elected optional form must be done according to the plan document's rules. In regard to your questions, consider this: I'm assuming your acccrued benefit numbers are single life annuity amounts. What would happen if the participant commenced distributions as a monthly life annuity on 4/1/2026 at $1,090/month and then died on 4/2/2026? Now compare that to what would happen if they took $9,810 on 4/1/2026 instead. Do you see the problem? As an aside, this is why you should never do RMDs from DB plans as life annuities. Use a term certain only annuity without life contingencies, that way if the participant dies, the undistributed part of their accrued benefit is not forfeited. Alternatively, you can do a lump sum distribution of the entire accrued benefit, use the DC account balance method to calculate the portion that is an RMD, and roll over the rest. Just be aware of 436 restrictions and the 110% funded rule if you go this route.
-
ASC can natively import txt files. Is the file structured in any reasonable way? Have you tried using one of ASC's import wizards or their predefined importer specs, if one exists for the data source you're using? If you want to take the approach of using code to extract/transform data before loading it into ASC, then a chatbot could probably help you write the code. I'd recommend that you know enough Python (or whatever language) to be able to read and understand the bot's output before relying on it in production. People on the internet seem to like Claude for that kind of task these days, but I can't offer any personal experience.
-
SECURE 2.0 Section 603 - another Roth catch-up question
C. B. Zeller replied to WCC's topic in 401(k) Plans
Plans limiting pre-tax catch-up contributions for employees not subject to section 414(v)(7). The rules of paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section also apply to a plan that includes a qualified Roth contribution program and, in accordance with an optional plan term providing for aggregation of wages under § 1.414(v)-2(b)(4)(ii), (b)(4)(iii), or (b)(4)(iv)(A), does not permit pre-tax catch-up contributions for one or more employees who are not subject to section 414(v)(7). The bolded part makes all the difference here. Normally, you do not aggregate wages from multiple employers to deterimine if an employee is subject to mandatory Roth catch-up - even if the employers are part of a controlled group or otherwise aggregated for other plan purposes. However, the referenced sections provide for optional aggregation of wages if the companies are using common paymaster, are aggregated under 414(b), (c), (m) or (o), or in the year of an asset purchase. If the plan is optionally aggregating wages under one of those provisions, then you may end up with some employees who would not normally be subject to mandatory Roth catch-up, but who are solely because of the aggregation. What the quoted paragraph is saying is that a plan can restrict those employees to Roth catch-up even though strictly speaking they are not subject to 414(v)(7). -
Does a Solo 401(k) plan’s user know she needs a TPA’s help?
C. B. Zeller replied to Peter Gulia's topic in 401(k) Plans
As of right now, it looks like the article is running under the title "America’s Booming Solo Workers Embrace $72,000 Tax Shelter" Besides Form 5500, possible pain points include: Capturing any non-owner employees who are required to be covered (including long-term part-time employees) Analysis of related employers which could result in a controlled group or affiliated service group With respect to an unincorporated business, calculation of net earned income, both for purposes of limiting contributions to 100% of compensation and deduction of employer contributions to 25% of compensation Applying limitations on distributions Applying mandatory tax withholding on distributions Reporting distributions on Form 1099-R Applying a plan's loan provisions -
You mean like https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/employers-and-advisers/plan-administration-and-compliance/reporting-and-filing/form-5500 ?
