The Form 14568-H Model VCP Compliance Statement, Schedule 8 (Failure to Pay Required Minimum Distributions Timely) asks whether "At least one affected participant is either an owner-employee (see IRC Section 401(c)(3)) or, if the plan sponsor is a corporation, a 10 percent owner of such corporation." The individual plan participant involved in the RMD failure is married to a 10 percent owner of the plan sponsor (a corporation) but is not himself a 10% owner. The question makes no mention of attribution, so I am comfortable checking "no" because there is no such person involved in the failure. I looked in Rev. Proc. 2016-51; this issue is not addressed from what I can see (see section 6.09(2)). I think the form would have said "including attribution under section 318" if that's what it meant. Thoughts appreciated!

[Advert.]

Learn more about plan design issues, plan investments, fiduciary responsibility and plan fees, employee communications and investment education, automatic enrollment, participant loans, distributions, and plan amendment and termination.

Accountant is 50% partner in an LLC. A client of the LLC hires the accountant personally (separately from the LLC's work) to oversee work related to possible sale of the company. Client pays the accountant separately for this work. Can the accountant have a pension plan separately from the partnership based on this revenue?

My wife will reach age 70-1/2 in 2018. If her initial RMD is deferred until 2019, is it based on the 12/31/17 account value, or the 12/31/18 amount? (She will be converting a portion to a Roth in 2018 so the 12/31/18 value will be less.) Also, when a dividend is declared in December and not paid until January, it doesn't appear in the year-end account valuation. Must it be included when calculating the basis for RMD?

Perhaps it's too much eggnog, but I can't seem to wrap my mind around this issue. We have a client with 2 plans. One plan excludes union employees. The other covers only union employees. They are in a right to work state and have many employees who have chosen not to join the union. I believe the employees covered by the collective bargaining agreement, whether or not they choose to join the union, belong in the union plan. Is that sufficient to make them excludable in the non-union plan testing? Or must they actually be union members to be excludable?

A 401(k) participant died in California, leaving behind few assets. According to the plan, his benefit should be distributed to his estate. But in California, if a person dies with few assets, it is prohibitively expensive to open an estate. Instead, "successors" of the decedent can sign an affidavit pursuant to CA Probate Code Sec. 13100-13116. In the affidavit, the successor basically attests he/she is the "successor" of the decedent, has the best claim to the property, and is entitled to the property. Our particular Participant has four sisters with equal rights to his property. On sister has submitted an affidavit with the Plan, claiming 1/4 of his account balance. Can we make a check out to this "beneficiary" by name? It seems logical, but the plan says to distribute to the estate, so I don't want to violate the terms of the plan. We've offered to make a check out to her as executor of the estate, but her attorney will not allow that. What are our options?