BG5150

Kinda. For large plan, fee caps at $2,000 for one plan year, and $4,000 for two or more plan years.

I would file both late. Charge the auditor the DFVCP fees for both years.

If everyone is in their own group with no conditions, everyone technically qualifies for a profit sharing. But it's up to the sponsor to allocate it. They can choose to not give it to those not employed on the last day of the year. Or those with less than 1,000 hours. (Or both!) But, say a valued employee who was there for many years "retires" in December at age 62 and the owners want to reward her for her service. If the last day is hard coded, they would have to do an 11-g amendment to give her anything. In the case of individual groups and no conditions, they can choose to give her something. But if they start making arbitrary decisions, I think they lose the ABT to pass coverage. I can count on one hand the number of plans I've had to use the ABT for coverage. (Can still use it for nondiscrimination testing, though). Hope this helps.

When will the audit be done?

I was thinking the other way. Your first post intimated that only the new participant needs a top heavy contribution; you didn't say "all" participants. Rev Rul 2004-13 specifically addressed dual eligibility. The plan loses TH exception if there is dual eligibility for SH match. See Situation 4. rr-04-13.pdf

Out of curiosity, why isn't the 2019 form filed yet? Is it the sponsor's fault? Or the auditor's?

Just out of curiosity, what is the profit sharing formula? Is it grouping method? Pro rata? Integrated? Why not just make it grouping method with everyone in own group. This way you can just do away with stated conditions for a PS and artificially add them in as needed.

I don't understand this. If the new EEs get a TH contribution, then the plan is no longer "solely" funded with deferrals and SH. So TH is due to everyone. What am I missing?

If they are HCE, they get tested as HCE. That simple. Is it advantageous to them to use the top-paid group election? that is have only 2 HCE? And remember, when using the TPG, that is ONLY for the compensation test. So, if you have employees who are earning more than either of the the owners' plan compensation, then you may wind up with more HCE than 2.

Not much help, but...

I looked up "deposit" and "deposited" in the BPD and none of the hits were relevant to the topic. I'll look further.

Side note: If a Plan Sponsor with a large Spanish-speaking employee population offers investments that don't have Spanish prospecti, is there a fiduciary breach somewhere?

Employer has several late remittances of deferrals to the trust. Prohibited transaction. Fix (perhaps) under VFCP. Is it also an operational error? Corrected under SCP? If so, what "operation" under the plan doc did they violate?

It is your discretion whether to use the SHM or not in the ACP test. If VAT contributions are made, then the plan does not consist "solely" of deferrals and a safe harbor contribution. Therefore, the plan is subject to top heavy rules.

The only way I could see them tied into the 5500 is that they are excluded from the plan for some reason and are not int he participant count because of it.

To my knowledge they don't. And, to be honest, I don't trust that they apply the accumulated amount rule properly either. I've never been in a position to check.

I don't think so. Is someone asking for a list of HCE & Key EEs?

To me, the term "and to what extent" means they can put a cap on those distributions, or choose which sources are allowed. At any rate the window has now closed, so it's a moot point.

So in this case the A/P can't take their money either whenever they want or if/when the participant has a distributable even, or when the participant terminates? They have to wait until the participant dies/turns 72? Is the participant's account so severely restricted? They can only take the money at retirement or death? That's harsh! Check with the document provider for an absolute answer. You may be looking in the wrong spot. The Datair Doc I deal with let's the employer to allow distribs to A/P a different times, like attainment of retirement age, severance of employment or even just when the QDRO is effective.

I've seen on a platform that you can invest different sources into different investments if you wanted to. Like put your deferrals into the life cycle fund but invest match into something more aggressive. But I've never seen a different set of investments offered from one source to another. Like funds A, B, C & D allowed only for pre-tax and funds D, E, F & G available only for Roth and maybe funds H, I , J & K for match.

Mary do you mean that for a plan with both pre-tax and Roth deferrals both sources have the participant invested in the same funds? OR that they can invest, say, into funds A & B for pre-tax and funds C & D for Roth? Or are you asking if it is ok for the plan to offer funds A, B, C, D for pre-tax and maybe funds A, B, E & F for Roth?

10% withholding unless otherwise elected by the person?

That's for the NHCE %. I'm using HCE % and working backward. But that little saying is ingrained into me for many years...

This is a question for the employer's counsel, IMO. Is the employer reasonably certain the information was received? Are the notices sent to company e-mails or personal e-mails? If they are going to a home address, they must give consent first, I believe.

Is the company tracking that the e-mails are successfully delivered and read?