Jakyasar

My first missed 9/15 deadline for MRC in well over 20 years. I want to make sure I understand what needs to be done per my research. Client did not make the MRC by today, around 30k I checked 5330 and looks like it is section 4971a related. Subject to 10% penalty - not sure when needs to be paid but will instruct as soon as filed. According to instructions, 5330 is due by 10/15 and no extension was required. It still needs to be paid by 12/31/2025 and if not then IRS could impose penalty up to 100% for subsequent years. I have to do interest adjustment based on the date they will make the deposit (if they will) Am I correct on all above?

Thank you for your input. Still researching but not looking good.

Hi A general question as researching it. Have you ever switched from a BOY to an EOY val? I am aware of the other way around with automatic approval. If you have, can you share how managed it, if possible? Thanks

Agree but dealing with different circumstances

Of course they are family members

Me too unless the rollover happened before turning 73 which is already too late.

Hi Owner only DB plan, wants to terminate and distribute during 2025 Already turned 73 during 2025 i.e. first RMD is due 4/1/2026. Needs an RMD during 2025 i.e. split the distribution between rollover and RMD? In a different scenario for the same owner, plan is overfunded but only wants to rollover the full benefit and keep the plan open as will hire others to eat up the overfunding. As this in-service distribution will happen during 2025, is it subject to RMD during 2025 i.e. before the rollover? Thanks

Hi When filing the 5500 forms on behalf of a client with the esigner authorization signed by the client, does the 5500 form need to be a wet signature? I have attended many podiums where it was ok thru DocuSign or something similar. Someone I am dealing with is insisting on being wet which I do not think it is correct? Also, looking at a possible takeover where the actuary signature on SB is electronic. I thought SB's has to be wet signatures. Thanks for your comments.

Yes, they need to sign a joinder to be a part of the plan. If no joinder all eligible employees will still be part of all coverage testing with no benefits, if I understood your question correctly. However, still need to check the plan document and see for CG/ASG purposes, all other companies (other than the sponsor) are automatically included in the plan even without a joinder agreement.

Hi Your second and third paragraphs confirm my understanding. The first paragraph is a different story which is not applicable to this mess but thank you. It is an EOY val. Any comments on? "Let's assume that it was intended that both companies to adopt the plan, say, going back to 2019, inception year (I have a feeling the plan operated similar to 2023 in prior years, afraid to ask/check but must). Can this be corrected without VFCP i.e. is there a self-correction on this or must file with the IRS for correction? Any other comments/suggestions?"

Hi Looking at a possible takeover plan which I think there may be an issue with deduction. I think I know the answer (sorry, a bit fried brain today) but want to see if anyone has a fresh look and comment. My apologies for a rather long explanation. If I am not clear in any of the points, please let me know. Not sure if a CG or ASG or if any at all but for arguments sake let's say either CG or ASG (still waiting on info). Looking at 2023. this is a DB plan. Prior TPA valuation report shows 300k as salary for pension purposes. Deduction was 200k. Company A (a partnership) sponsors the plan. The majority partner's se income in box 14A shows 300k. There is also 500k under box 14C - non-farm income (which cannot be used for pension, if I recall correctly). Assume the other partner is silent and has no box 14A income. If this was the only company sponsoring the plan with ASG/CG, even the though the deduction is within 300k se income limits under box 14A, the salary is definitely not as they would need 14A to be over 500k+ (excluding the 1/2 se tax adjustment), as per prior TPA report. Now, Company B (a sole proprietorship), which is part of CG/ASG as assumed above and owned by the majority partner 100%. Line 31 of the schedule c shows 300k (but not adopted the plan). If I recall correctly, for 415 limit purposes, you add both entities, please correct me on this. However, for pension/deduction purposes, one cannot add both incomes for valuation purposes, only Company A can be used, please correct me on this as well. Let's assume that it was intended that both companies to adopt the plan, say, going back to 2019, inception year (I have a feeling the plan operated similar to 2023 in prior years, afraid to ask/check but must). Can this be corrected without VFCP i.e. is there a self-correction on this or must file with the IRS for correction? Any other comments/suggestions? Thank you for your time.

This is possibly a stupid question but need to check. Company A and Company B are CG. Setting up a plan for Company A (sponsor) where Company B is an adopting employer. Plan excludes leased employees. Owner contacts and says, a Company A leases employees to Company B, the leased employees should not be excluded. I read the section for leased employees under basic plan document and my understanding is that Company A is not a "leasing organization". I do not think it applies here as it is a different definition like a temp agency or something like that. Besides as both entities are CG and no employees are excluded, who cares. Am I missing something here? Thanks

To all: After researching and checking with the doc vendor as well, I concur that 110% applies to all situations involving HCEs, I simply could not find a way out. Thank you all for your comments and have a great weekend.

Language in the BPD states "any HCE". I am checking with the vendor and see if any other sections would address this. I agree that if a rank&file HCE would be subject to but husband and wife? Thank you for your input.

DB plan covers husband and wife only. Biz is owned by husband but he retires/terminates and wife continues to to run the biz. Does 110% rule apply to pay out the husband? thanks

Also need to check what the top heavy requirements are as if the keys are required to get top heavy, some minimums may need to be allocated. As all above, the document's allocation requirements need to be checked.

For debate only, is merging considered to be termination?

Understood and thank you for your input.

I was not thinking of different schedules, just that service exclusion for the new plan. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying.

Checking a thought/curiosity as never dealt with it before nor have any idea. Company has an existing 401k/PS plan for many years. They need to add a second PS plan with better allocation provisions and then merge the new plan into the existing plan. Upon merging, will the new PS plan's benefits need to be 100% vested, assuming the new plan's vesting service will start with the inception of the plan, assuming that the new PS can even have this provision? Thank you,

Thank you all for your comments and insignt.

Bri, was your response to my or Belgrath's comment?

The plans are combo, DC+CB

Did not come across this situation before. Companies A & B are controlled group Company A sponsors plan # 001 They want to add 2 more plans but the want company B to be the sponsor Are the new plans required to be #002 and #003? Thanks

I am surprised that they were never contacted for missing 5500 forms in the past by the IRS or DoL unless they never filed in the first place. I agree with Paul that a legal counsel would be a wise a step especially where no records are available. Got to catch this before either IRS or DoL wakes up and asks for prior filings.