Leaderboard

The 415(c) limit is 54,000 (for anyone earning at least $54,000) but the $6,000 catch-up is not part of the 415(c) limit. So if you have employee over age 50 who deferred the maximum $24,000 (including catch-up) then the remaining allocation to reach the 415(c) limit is technically $54,000 - $18,000 = $36,000. Now if the employer allocation is less than or equal to $36,000 you are fine for 415(c), if the allocation is greater than $36,000 you are going to have a 415 excess that you need to deal with.

after tax has to have ACP testing 1.401(m)-3(j)(6) you can use the safe harbor match in ACP testing as well. 1.401(m)-2(a)(5)(iv) permits you to exclude matching contributions that do not exceed 4% of comp. general consensus is top-heavy free means nothing other than deferral or safe harbor so that is probably ruined.

In the first example, the discretionary match applies to the first dollar again. The below example ignores the first 4% under the discretionary match formula similar to the original question?? 5.a.1)b) Example - enhanced match on first 4% of compensation with discretionary match on higher levels of compensation. A safe harbor 401(k) plan provides a 100% match on the first 4% of compensation deferred. The employer also wants the discretion to contribute an additional amount on deferrals exceeding 4% of compensation but not more than 6% of compensation, limiting the rate of the discretionary match to 100% of such deferrals. When presented with this example at a Q&A session at the 2012 ASPPA Annual Conference, the IRS stated that this would not satisfy the requirements for the ACP safe harbor. The enhanced match formula of 100% match on the first 4% of compensation deferred is used to satisfy the ADP safe harbor, and the discretionary match cannot be combined with the enhanced match for ADP safe harbor purposes. Thus, the discretionary portion must be separately analyzed and it fails the requirements for the ACP safe harbor because it doesn’t match deferrals below 4% of compensation. In other words, where a portion of the match is used to satisfy the ADP safe harbor, the remaining match also must be able to stand alone under the ACP safe harbor. Where that formula is discretionary, it must allocate matching contributions starting at the first dollar of elective deferrals and otherwise meet the requirements for the ACP safe harbor. The IRS didn’t provide a citation to support this interpretation of the law. Treas. Reg. §1.401(m)-3 does not explicitly state such a rule. The IRS’ concern, although not expressed in the Q&A session, might be that where the discretionary match applies only to deferrals above a certain level, the employer may decide to make the discretionary match only when only HCEs are deferring at such levels or only a low percentage of NHCs are doing so. Note that in the example in 5.a.1)a), each matching formula could individually satisfy the requirements of the ACP safe harbor, so the IRS apparently wouldn’t challenging the analysis shown in that example, even though all of the matching contributions (including those used to satisfy the ADP safe harbor) are combined to demonstrate compliance with the ACP safe harbor. Note, too, that the IRS did not take the position that the discretionary matching formula caused the fixed formula to fail to satisfy the ADP safe harbor. It was just the ACP safe harbor that was failed.

As long as it has not been executed. For example, if payment has been made or has started to the alternate payee pursuant to the QDRO the plan is unlikely to accept the new or modified order.