Leaderboard

I'd say you can't force out the over $5K participants. The fact that the one member of the controlled group folded is irrelevant IMO. The "employer" is the controlled group of entities, the employer did not terminate the plan, some of the employees were let go is all. Now ask the question about the same situation in a multiple employer plan.........

Management Group rules are still in the Code. The withdrawals of IRS Regulations on the matter simply means that the IRS offers no guidance, but it's still a rule. In this case, you clearly have 100% of the income being derived from "what HE classifies as Management". By HIS own admission, it seems like a Management Group to me. Good Luck!

And for the DB plan, you can require 1,000 hours, but not a last day. So if the participant is: participating both plans (DB and DC) works 1,000 hours in the plan year terminates before the last day of the plan year the document states the TH minimum is provided in the DC plan the DB plan states participants in both plans will receive the TH in the DC plan the DC plan states participants in both plans get 5% of pay top heavy, but requires they be there on the last day Is the last day requirement for the 5% top heavy overridden due to the combo arrangement, or Is the TH minimum not needed due to the last day requirement (TH is satisfied without 5% of pay), or Is the top heavy provided in the DB plan for that final year of participation? Again, one must look carefully at how the documents are worded.

I was a "tag-along" to an attorney discussion on a similar topic last year. I'm summarizing here: the attorneys referenced PTE 80-26 and an article written by the Groom law firm. The focus was on (1) what does the plan say, and (2) whether there was a de facto loan between the parties (ie, the plan and the sponsor). The conclusion reached was, "If there is a chance that the employer advances will not be reimbursed within 60 days, a written, no-interest loan agreement is required between the employer and the plan." If your prior expense is more than 60 days old, you may have a problem with the plan making that reimbursement, especially if there is nothing implying the plan will make a reimbursement (possibility under certain conditions). It's prudent to get the auditor's input, in advance.

Next year - 2016.

No plan NEEDS to provide a QDIA notice, but if you want fiduciary relief for defaulting participant's into an investment choice, especially those who refuse to make an investment selections themselves, then you MUST provide the notice.