Leaderboard

You are covered, but that is not the way I would say it. If deferrals and Safe Harbor contributions are the only allocation anyone received, the Plan is deemed to be "not top heavy".

You also need to make sure the timing of the amendment doesn't make it discriminatory. For example, is the only person affected by the amendment the spouse of the owner? See 1.401(a)(4)-1(b)(4) and 1.401(a)(4)-5(a).

Thank you ETA Consulting, LLC and Kevin C. It's actually not the spouse, it's a NHCE....so I think we are good. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts.

Plan eligibility and the deferral start date can be two different things..

Unless the sponsor can use the psychic hotline to know this person was going to terminate after the in-service distribution I am not sure what that procedure would look like. True. I missed the part about in-service. Must be the Friday morning reading comprehension lapse...

Unless the sponsor can use the psychic hotline to know this person was going to terminate after the in-service distribution I am not sure what that procedure would look like.

You basically want to change the provision that says anyone employed on June 15th is eligible for the plan and subsequent hires must work a year. There is a provision in most adoption agreements to do that (e.g. provide a date for which all current employees become eligible). Amending the plan mid-year to accomplish this would seem doable with respect to the new IRS regulations on mid-year amendments. Some would argue that you could always do this. Good Luck!

Ah, ok, I was not grading on grammar, only substance!

Life could get interesting, and of course we do not have the document. So on 5/1 the only ones eligible are those who rolled their funds into the plan (one could say), On 6/1 everyone else became eligible since that is the first time they could defer. Just saying.

I may be wrong, but it couldn't have anything to do with ACA. There is no interaction between ACA and defined benefit or defined contribution plans (or at least none that I know of). Not to say that there is no information ever requested for census purposes with respect to defined benefit or defined contribution employer costs, but I had never heard of any such need. Is your client so difficult that they would not give you any information with respect to something they asked you to do for them? Not that it is easy to get to that point, but a good term for such a client is "ex-client".