Leaderboard

Cross-tested plan design seems to bring it on.

You didn't take the time to read the whole thread, did you? Anybody who claims that any part of the principal repaid is double taxed is, shall we say, mathematically challenged.

Doesn't your scenario leave out the $10,000 loan that you didn't pay taxes on? I have $0 so I take a loan of $10,000 I now have $10,000 I receive income of $50,000 that I pay taxes on I now have $60,000, but I only paid taxes on $50,000 I repay the $10,000 loan with $100 interest I now have $49,900 and I paid taxes on $50,000 When I withdraw that $10,100, I will be taxed twice on $100, and once on $10,000

Clearly. Subject to 411(d)(6) getting in your way. It doesn't sound like 411(d)(6) is an issue.

Thanks for clarifying; that was the way I read the original posting. Now, I suggest you go back and re-read my posts (and please ignore someone who hides behind the alias ETA Consulting who can't keep a civil tongue in his head and clearly can't help you get the right answer; I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent). I'm going to recap for you. You note you are dealing with a 401(k) plan that does not provide for the SH minimum for HCEs. Good design. I'm going to assume that it also has a last day employment provision. Therefore, you can amend it currently (during the 2019) year to limit any one of your HCE allocations to a dollar amount that includes zero from the employer. You can do that amendment right up until the last day of the year because no benefit is ACCRUED until that last day. That sounds like exactly what you want to do, no? As I previously noted, the amendment to limit the allocation for a particular individual is done at the plan level; it is NOT an election by the participant. It is an amendment by the plan sponsor to the plan. I know you said you don't do many of these plans; I do hundreds. Feel free to give me a call at 413-736-2066 or email me directly at larrystarr@qpc-inc.com and I can even give you a sample amendment that will accomplish what you are looking for. Hope this helps. That is the whole idea of these boards. Take care.

.....and nobody has even brought up VEBAs and 412(I)!

Admittedly having done no research on this, it's no longer his benefit, so I would think that not only is the plan not obligated to provide the information, it would be wrong to provide the information. What if he asked whether a co-worker had started receiving his/her benefit? (Although what possible adverse ramifications could there be if the plan stupidly did answer his question?) And since the husband isn't making a claim for benefits, and he hasn't been denied anything (except information not applicable to his benefit), I don't see how the claims appeal process is possibly implicated.

Well, first of all, new comp is really a testing method, not a type of plan (although some adoption agreements may even say "new comp allocation" but if you look closely, it doesn't, or shouldn't, force you to use new comp testing). In other words, you can have "everyone in their own group" and allocate whatever you want (subject to testing) and then either test on a contributions or benefits (new comp) basis. That type of plan tested on a contributions basis would allow for contributions that look just like they were allocated on a PD method (at 100% of wage base) but you could easily exclude an HCE as you want to do here.

That is my understanding. I know IRS Pubs are not authoritative, but...I am going to refer to IRS Pub 571 anyway. Under the chapter on "Limitations on Annual Additions", it says " More than one 403(b) account. If you contributed to more than one 403(b) account, you must combine the contributions made to all 403(b) accounts maintained by your employer. If you participate in more than one 403(b) plan maintained by different employers, you don’t need to aggregate for annual addition limits. "- 2017 Edition. 403(b)s multiple Pub 571.pdf