Leaderboard

It's like Whack-A-Mole. You see the issue clearly. What agent wants to do is discriminatory. What ErnieG says will work, but it's more expensive to cover NHCEs. Some say they provide an additional PS contribution, over and above what is necessary to pass (a)(4) testing, to cover the insurance premiums needed to provide insured death benefits in the DC plan that equal the relative HCE death benefits in the DB plan. Arguably this could work, but this would be a huge amount of work to initially calculate and then monitor and adjust annually to keep death benefits non-discriminatory. Who is going to do this work and who is going to pay for it? Once all that work is done and paid for, and once the additional PS contributions are made to pay for the NHCE insurance, what's the point? What is the economic benefit of buying life insurance for HCEs in the DB that makes all of this worthwhile?

Yes, in looking at this again, I agree the Regulation does seem to indicate that if a plan that uses a match that satisfies ACP still needs to run an ACP test due to after-tax contributions, the ACP test can also include matching.

I don't have a cite but I'm quite sure it is required. It is a "summary" of the annual report, and there was an annual report, so why not? Otherwise there would be a gap in the (useless) information in the SARs.

It is my understanding that if part-time employees do share in employer contributions, they will receive vesting credit for each year they worked 500 hours or more, rather than the 1,000 hours for full-time employees.

Thanks, but I'm forced to disagree, if by "excess deferral" you mean a violation of the 402(g) limit? That limit is a dollar limit, and that dollar limit hasn't been violated here. It isn't an ADP failure, so I don't see any option other than to consider it a 415 violation. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you are saying?

Note that this thread is made obsolete by Section 612 of the EGTRRA. https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ16/PLAW-107publ16.htm