Plan year is calendar year 2018. Limitation year is 2018. Fiscal year is 4/1/2017 -- 3/31/2018. Extended tax filing deadline is 12/15/2018.

Plan excludes pre-participation compensation. Eligibility is 3 months/250 hours, monthly entry.

Participant is hired in 2018 -- let's say on June 14. Enters plan on October 1, 2018. Compensation from Date of Participation is $30,000.

Prior TPA has been allocating contributions made for a given fiscal year for the prior plan year, based upon prior plan year compensation. Example: or 2017 plan year, allocations were made based on 2016 calendar year compensation.

I don't see how this can work. While you can theoretically allocate a contribution made in a current plan year, with the fiscal year ending in the current plan year, for a prior plan year, how can you allocate for 2017 (in the circumstances above) based on 2018 participating compensation, when the only participating compensation is during plan year 2018? There is no 2017 plan year compensation. Am I missing something?

Enroll in the Certified Employee Benefit Specialist? (??CEBS) program and earn the most respected designation in the benefits industry. Developed in partnership with the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Get started, enroll today.

A terminated participant has a residual balance of $5... so his RMD is less than the cost of the stamp it would take to mail the check to him. I know there's talk of not having RMDs if the AB is <$50K, but that's not here today. Any thoughts on just giving this a pass?

Can someone speak to whether or not contributions to a 403b plan are tax deductible for a New Jersey resident (for purposes of New Jersey state income tax)? Someone is saying that they New Jersey does not recognize the deduction for 403b plans, but does for 401k plans. Yet I have plenty of New Jersey customers and this has never come up -- much less the issue of basis that people would have in their accounts. It could even get messier if for example they do not get the deduction in New Jersey and then they move to California to retire, and take the money out and pay California tax on the way out. This just cannot be. On a similar note, I heard the same thing about 457b plans.

Husband/wife own 96% of the company and are eligible for the plan. No other employees. Their adult kids own the other 4%, but the kids are not employees, not eligible for the plan. Eligible for EZ, or must they file SF?