E/er's MPPP contribution formula was amended to 0% of compensation, i.e., plan frozen in 2001. E/er also maintains a PSP. In reviewing plan doc's for GUST restatement the PSP document requires that a top heavy contribution be made to the e/er's MPPP if the e/er maintains one and the MPPP document mirrors that language. Was considering amending that language to the efffect that "... any such top heavy minimum contribution shall be made to e/er's PSP in any year that e/er's MPPP is frozen..." Reg. §1.416-1 T-5 wouldn't appear to help in this situation if the plan doc's actually mandate where the top heavy contribution goes. Any suggestions re proposed amendment? Thanks.

here is a thought -
in the old days - at least a year or so ago, you still had to make contributions to a frozen DB plan if the plan was top heavy. if I recall, the comments in regards to a DC plan were simply, in the case of a dc, since the key ee is probably at 0 then no contribution would be necessary.
without diggin back through notes on frozen plans, it sounds like maybe you have to make a contribution to a frozen MP plan, to satisfy top heavy for the 2002!

Chris, check the language of the plan very carefully. Usually TH minimum benefits are referred to "additional minimum benefits" required under certain circumstances. If the PSP provides for 3% or more, then the MPPP additional minimum benefits are, in fact, zero. But it depends on document language.