Bill Presson

"satisfying coverage" would still be an issue because "former HCE" isn't an HCE.

call your attorney.

PS - yes to last day requirement (subject to discrimination testing) SHNEC - no to last day requirement

Yes. In fact, you could set up a plan to just cover a single NHCE and have no testing. We have done things like this quite often for fast food operations, etc. The owners aren't worried about participating, so we exclude them (and all other HCEs if they have any) and cover only the managers and assistant managers at each location. Generally those people are paid pretty well, but don't qualify as HCEs.

What advantage would a SIMPLE 401(k) have over a regular 401(k)?

A SIMPLE 401(k) is a combination of all the bad parts of a SIMPLE IRA and a 401(k) plan. I've never run across an employer for which a SIMPLE 401(k) was a good solution.

I've never seen a non elective contribution calculated on a per pay period basis.

Then it's only owners. Non owners aren't HCEs the first year of their employment.

If the plan requires it, you have to do it. The plan document will outline what refunds to do for a 415 excess.

I wasn't worried about the charges. Just that you CAN'T have a plan with just Roth. So if you have set it up as 002, it's wrong.

Agreed. This is the issue.

Same

If I had thought about it, I would have made the effort to do so! 😁

Thanks for saying hello!

If the employee was a participant on 1/1/21, then SF

Ms Vicki, jeans and a nice shirt will be fine. Speakers usually dress nicer and I'll always have on a bow tie. But you'll fit right in without any issues.

Agree with EBE. I have spoken to a very good TPA friend who knows her stuff about CALPERS and she told me that remote employees in California were subject to the coverage rules. FWIW.

Agreed. It also tends to defeat the advantage of a prevailing wage provision in the plan because, if it's a CODA, the amounts are subject to all the FICA, etc, labor costs.

With the 3% SHNEC, you lock in your cost in advance. With the others, your contribution is dependent on what the NHCs contribute.

Timing of the divorce is relevant. Also, have they had any minor children during this time?

I think it matters depending on whether they are intended to be in the plan for the whole or part year. We typically include the "entry" date since that will correspond to when the employer allowed them to defer (for example) and we want that part to be clear.

Agreed. Same.

Agreed. Just tell him to make sure the entities overlap in existance.

Agreed

HCE determination (and lots of other things) is made under section 318 and is different than attribution for controlled groups (section 1563). Under 318, a parent is deemed to own a child's stock no matter the age of the child or the percentage ownership in the business. I love this summary from Lincoln. https://www.lfg.com/wcs-static/pdf/Attribution of Ownership in Retirement Plans - PDF.pdf