FJR

Correct me if I'm wrong, we are only talking about this issue of last day. 1,000 hrs. because we use the 3% SH. If this was just a straight 401(k) no SH, Profit Sharing plan, then we would be able to exclude completely w/o giving the gateway? In that case, the individual is not benefitting?

so there is really no advantage of having the last day or 1000 hrs. rule under this type of arrangement? Please let me know advantages for design purposes. thanks for all your input.

So in a Safe Harbor Cross-tested Plan, when can you apply the 1,000 hours and last day requirement? Seems like as long as someone benefits by getting the 3% SH contribution, that would always entitle them to the gateway, whether they are employed on the last day or not?

Thanks Arch, Just clarifying what seissler posted.

Doesn't the gateway pass with 4.55%?

Let me clarify: Plan Doc has 1,000 hrs. last day requirement. The contr. rate for the owner who max's is 13.66% Eligibility is normal 1 Yr. dual entry. The EE in question is the one that Termed with less then 500 hrs. Also this EE is one of a total of two eligible NHCE's Thanks.

Cross-tested 401(k) SH plan. Three groups, 2 of which define the person by owner and year born. The 3rd group is all others. Plan is TH After running eligibility we have 4 eligible EE's. 2 owners and 2 NHCE's. The one owner max's out by contributing 401(k) and the rest PS. The other owner has $0 401(k) and wants to get $0 PS. Now we are left with the 2 NHCE's and here is the question. One NHCE has termed with <500 hrs. Give that EE the 3% SH only? I get confused with coverage, given this person is not included. Thanks.

How about the election was made to defer the $13,000, it just wasn't deposited yet.

Just a confirm. Client is non-gov, not for profit entity. Has 401(k) plan that the key ee maximizes by contributing the full 16K for 2004. Can they contribute another 13K in the 457(b)? I also assume no catch-up available in the (b)? Thanks

Then this is a great way to get around this.

WDIK, thanks and I was sure of that. As we do more and more of these I just wanted a confirmation. We have that very situation where literally there are no rank and file contributing. What proof do you have to show that they have been properly educated and recieved the SH notifications. To an outsider it could look like the owner isn't educating or informing the EE's.

I was curious about this. What if you had a Safe Harbor Plan that was Top Heavy and you did pay someone out who ended up Forfeiting their non-vested balance? The question is normally you would have to allocate a 3% Top Heavy Min., but what if you were able to use the Forf. towards expenses first? Would this get you back to a free pass on TH?

I know this will sound stupid, but how does a Safe Harbor Match allow you to automatically pass the ADP test? If you have a plan that is designed as a safe harbor with the basic safe harbor match formula and no other contributions going in, then what happens if you get only 2 key employees to contribute and no other NHCE's participate. Is there somewhere in the Regs that allow you to get by without an ADP test? Thanks.

I had one better. Under "Sex", rather then the usual Male or Female, the response was "not enough"

Safe Harbor Match

Can anyone run down the general format of how they run a X-tested plan in relius. I am more interested under the general non-discrimination testing of what boxes you check. For example, SSRA or impute disparity. What tests they run and what to look for. Tom any suggestions?

GBurns, what is pension administration? You mentioned you do not plan on doing that. I am not sure what you mean by pension administration. By the way, what do you call yourself? I would like to breakdown the definition to your response and debate that.

Most prototypes clearly state that if you are no longer doing business with that firm, that you can no longer use the document and it becomes null and void as of the day you terminate services.

I am probably confusing it with Top Heavy. If the Plan was TH, then you would have problems? What would you do about this regarding the document. My understanding is the EE could not pass the gateway with just the 3%. Document doesn't provide for additional contributions.

I am sure this has been asked, but appreciate a comment. Have X-tested plan that is not top heavy. No SH requirement. Plan has last day and 1000 hrs. If a participant has < 1000 hrs and is employed, he still needs to get the min. gateway? If yes, then what do you do about the document. We use Vol Sub. through Corbel Thanks

Excuse my ignorance, but if the HCE has not completed the 1yr. and only has the 3 months like the NHCE's. where does it say in the regs that you only set aside the NHCE's? My understanding is you would use both. Now, granted in most cases, the HCE's are usually not considered statuatory, but that is not a given.

Why wouldn't the HCE have to be included? What is the exception?

I appologize if this has been asked before. Regarding the Automatic Rollover Regulations, an arrangement has to be worked out by each QP with an IRA vendor who is willing to accept th Automatic Rollover. Anyone have a list of vendors doing this? What are other people out there doing? Thanks.

Just curious what version people are running these days? We haven't updated in a while and wanted to know if there were any problems on any of the newer versions. We will probably update to the most latest by year-end

I'm sure this has been asked, so sorry - Plan Year ending 10/31/04. What are the dollar limits: 414 limit = 40k or 41k? Comp limit = 200k or 205K? TWB = 87k or 87,900? Thanks.