Leaderboard

This is what was supposed to be typed. I guess my attempt a humour has failed. I won't quit my day job.

In what way is your question different than the interaction between 402g and catch-ups? It's precisely the same application, just a different limit. I think it is border line impossible that your document would not permit this. Our Corbel doc defines catch-up as (notice that there is no distinction between 401a30 (which is 402g of course) and 415©: 1.11 "Catch-Up Contribution" means, effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2001, an Elective Deferral made to the Plan by a Catch-Up Eligible Participant that, during any taxable year of such Participant, exceeds one of the following: (a) a statutory dollar limit on Elective Deferrals or "annual additions" as provided in Code Sections 401(a)(30), 402(h), 403(b), 408, 415©, or 457(b)(2) (without regard to Code Section 457(b)(3)), as applicable; It then goes on to say: (d) Certain amounts are not "annual additions." For purposes of applying the limitations of Code Section 415, the transfer of funds from one qualified plan to another is not an "annual addition." In addition, the following are not Employee contributions for the purposes of Section 4.4(e)(1)(b): (1) rollover contributions (as defined in Code Sections 402©, 403(a)(4), 403(b)(8), 408(d)(3) and 457(e)(16)); (2) repayments of loans made to a Participant from the Plan; (3) repayments of distributions received by an Employee pursuant to Code Section 411(a)(7)(B) (cash-outs); (4) repayments of distributions received by an Employee pursuant to Code Section 411(a)(3)(D) (mandatory contributions); (5) Catch-Up Contributions; and (6) Employee contributions to a simplified employee pension excludable from gross income under Code Section 408(k)(6). So you never have a 415 excess. The very first penny over the statutory limit is NOT AN ANNUAL ADDITION. 1.11 makes it a catch-up contribution, and the next paragraph tells us that catch-ups do not count towards the limit. The argument of "well how do you know it was the 401k and not the profit sharing that went over the 415c limit" to me is a non-starter because only Elective Deferrals can be catch-ups (I've pondered this question myself). So, did you make a contribution over 415©? Yes? OK, then the profit sharing gets pushed up the 415 tube and the deferrals spill out of the top and into the catch-up tube. If the profit sharing was dropped in at the top of the tube and were left there above the 415 limit, then the reference to 415c has no effect. And it is well accepted that to interpret a law in a way that renders it useless would not be a reasonable interpretation. Your document probably uses similar structure. Check it out.