Schedule B and SB signature

[mphs77]

In reviewing the old filings for a client for which we have taken over administrative duties, I noticed a strange thing......

All Schedule B and SB filings were stamped and not signed.

I always thought a stamp was not allowable to be used for a Schedule B or SB.

Am I mistaken or is a stamp in lieu of an actual signature a problem?

[Andy the Actuary]

When the SB joins the Efast club, does the attached pdf reveal whether it is an actual signaure or scan of a signaure? A scan of a signature is subtley different from a scan of a rubber stamp. While not stated, the game has tacitly changed. However, you are correct about what the instructions require. The paper filed B's prior to Efast should not have been rubber stamped. The issue is if it were Bernie Madoff's plan, the 5500 might be deemed an untimely filing.

[mphs77]

When the SB joins the Efast club, does the attached pdf reveal whether it is an actual signaure or scan of a signaure? A scan of a signature is subtley different from a scan of a rubber stamp. While not stated, the game has tacitly changed. However, you are correct about what the instructions require. The paper filed B's prior to Efast should not have been rubber stamped. The issue is if it were Bernie Madoff's plan, the 5500 might be deemed an untimely filing.

The obvious stamp mark (the grainy signature and a long line representing the bottom of the stamp) is the only indication of a stamp being used. There is no attachment that states the SB was stamped in lieu of signed and that it represents the belief of the Plan's funding status in the view of the Actuary (or any such stuff like that).