Jump to content

25% of eligible compensation deductible limit


dmb

Recommended Posts

Thanks for all the quick responses.   I posted this for a coworker and more facts have come to light.  It's a start up profit sharing plan for calendar year 2017.  If we make effective date 1/1/17 and not add last day requirement until 2018, it's my understanding that we can include all 2017 comp the terminated participant since he will be eligible for an allocation.  If that doesn't sound right, we appreciate any further advice.  Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are 2 schools of thought.

anyone 'benefitting' under the coverage rules can be included whether they defer or not.

the other thought is that, since 2002 since deferrals are no longer counted toward the 25% deductibility issue it doesn't make sense to consider deferrals at all. so if someone doesn't receive a ps contribution (or match) don't include their comp. in other words, since for purposes of the 25% deduction limit you only consider employer contributions, then only folks who receive employer contributions should be considered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tom Poje said:

there are 2 schools of thought.

anyone 'benefitting' under the coverage rules can be included whether they defer or not.

the other thought is that, since 2002 since deferrals are no longer counted toward the 25% deductibility issue it doesn't make sense to consider deferrals at all. so if someone doesn't receive a ps contribution (or match) don't include their comp. in other words, since for purposes of the 25% deduction limit you only consider employer contributions, then only folks who receive employer contributions should be considered.

This IRS has tried, informally, to suggest that.  But, according to the Code, Deferrals are still treated as Employer Contributions for all plan purposes.  They are merely made pursuant to employee elections.  I can see the logic behind them changing it to be more consistent, but (like many other things) they need to give official guidance that can be relied upon. All they have to do is rule that deferrals are no longer "employer contributions".  I'm not sure, but that may require an act of Congress; the 401(k) Code seems to define them as Employer Contributions.

Good Luck! 

CPC, QPA, QKA, TGPC, ERPA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mike - I don't think anyone here suggested that

the argument is can you include someone's comp who could defer but doesn't. (or for that matter,  whether you should ignore any 401k eligibility since deferrals don't count toward deduction.

under the coverage rules anyone who could defer even if they don't are considered benefitting.  I think the IRS biggest concern is providing a big cash balance to HCEs, then nothing (or just deferrals) in a DC plan, but being able to use their compensation toward the 6% maximum. it seems like cheating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You misunderstand my application of 410(b).  It is applied twice. The application with respect to deferrals is irrelevant.  The application with respect to non-"401(k)-deferrals" is what I'm talking about.  

"I think the IRS biggest concern is providing a big cash balance to HCEs, then nothing (or just deferrals) in a DC plan, but being able to use their compensation toward the 6% maximum."

It is clear that you can't do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mike Preston said:

It is clear that you can't do that.

To your point, the IRS has referenced Section 404(n) of the Code as the authority for saying you cannot do that.  

Elective deferrals not taken into account for purposes of deduction limits

Elective deferrals (as defined in section 402(g)(3)) shall not be subject to any limitation contained in paragraph (3), (7), or (9) of subsection (a) or paragraph (1)(C) of subsection (h) and such elective deferrals shall not be taken into account in applying any such limitation to any other contributions.

 

Okay, I stand corrected on this one.  I haven't seen this one in my current book of plans, but do know that it was missed a lot during 2002 and 2011.  404(n) was added under EGTRRA.  I've never heard of it as an issue until 2011, but never heard a definitive rule.  According to the IRS, the definitive rule is Section 404(n).  Many of the industry software providers never made the adjustment.

I'm glad we had this discussion.  I learned something today :-) 

Good Luck!

CPC, QPA, QKA, TGPC, ERPA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...

I have a nit-picking question on this. Section 404(a)(3) refers to a deduction limit which takes into account the compensation of "beneficiaries" under the plan. the IRS, In PLR 2012229012, as noted above, appears to say that this means the employee who is eligible to defer, even if they DO defer, does not have their compensation counted unless they receive an "employer" contribution. 

What about in an ESOP? 404(a)(9)(A) refers to the compensation paid to "employees" when calculating limits. That's a difference from "beneficiaries." Does this mean that compensation from employees who receive no allocation may be considered? Seems like a stretch to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...