mwyatt Posted December 10, 2002 Posted December 10, 2002 Haven't done one of these for awhile; just wanted to confirm that the correct address (taken from Rev. Proc. 94-41) is still Assistant Commissioner Employee Plans and Exempt Organizations Attention: CP:E:EP:R P.O. Box 14073 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Also, my reading from 2002 schedule is that user fee amount is $2,200 (under 100 life plan with waiver request approx. $55,000). Can anyone confirm this address for me (just wanted to doublecheck due to all of the restructuring of the IRS). Thanks for your help.
david rigby Posted December 11, 2002 Posted December 11, 2002 I think the IRS issues a new Rev. Proc every January. This is applicable for 2002: http://www.benefitslink.com/IRS/revproc2002-8.shtml If you mail your application after the next Rev. Proc is issued, then the $2,200 fee might be incorrect. BTW, I assisted a client in filing a waiver request last December. Still have not heard from the IRS. I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.
mwyatt Posted December 11, 2002 Author Posted December 11, 2002 Thanks Pax for the reply. I have noticed the increases every year in the User Fee (what a kick in the pants in some ways as these are obviously clients in financial difficulty) and am planning on mailing the application this week. I guess that the address in 94-41 is still correct from your response (we use RIA Checkpoint and I assume that they would have posted a link to an update on the web if the address had changed). I was just checking to make sure that the address hadn't been updated since then due to all of the reorganization of the IRS (in fact is EP/EO even the department name anymore?).
david rigby Posted December 11, 2002 Posted December 11, 2002 I have found no other address, although it is possible that a better address is available. I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.
mwyatt Posted April 8, 2003 Author Posted April 8, 2003 An addendum (after spending about an hour this morning trying to track down the submitted application): Correct address to use now for funding waiver applications is Internal Revenue Service McPherson Station PO Box 27063 Washington, DC 20038 Would have been nice if the IRS had publicized the address change... (fortunately the application did eventually make its way to the right place).
Guest jerry2575 Posted April 23, 2003 Posted April 23, 2003 It would have been nice if the IRS had publicized the new address... We submitted a waiver application in March, and the postal service just returned it (yesterday!) as undeliverable. Since we sent it certified, we have proof of the timely mailing, and are hopeful the IRS will accept it as such. Has anyone else run into this problem of sending the waiver application to the address in 94-41, and the post office bouncing it back? Has the IRS accepted the application anyway???? YIP (yours in pensions), jerry2575
david rigby Posted April 23, 2003 Posted April 23, 2003 The client we assisted with a waiver needed three addresses: original address in Rev. Proc, and two more when other IRS offices asked for additional information. Ridiculous. I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.
david rigby Posted January 29, 2004 Posted January 29, 2004 FWIW, the IRS has issued a new Revenue Procedure on applications for waiver of minimum funding. http://benefitslink.com/IRS/revproc2004-15.pdf I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.