Jakyasar

This is possibly a stupid question but need to check. Company A and Company B are CG. Setting up a plan for Company A (sponsor) where Company B is an adopting employer. Plan excludes leased employees. Owner contacts and says, a Company A leases employees to Company B, the leased employees should not be excluded. I read the section for leased employees under basic plan document and my understanding is that Company A is not a "leasing organization". I do not think it applies here as it is a different definition like a temp agency or something like that. Besides as both entities are CG and no employees are excluded, who cares. Am I missing something here? Thanks

To all: After researching and checking with the doc vendor as well, I concur that 110% applies to all situations involving HCEs, I simply could not find a way out. Thank you all for your comments and have a great weekend.

Language in the BPD states "any HCE". I am checking with the vendor and see if any other sections would address this. I agree that if a rank&file HCE would be subject to but husband and wife? Thank you for your input.

DB plan covers husband and wife only. Biz is owned by husband but he retires/terminates and wife continues to to run the biz. Does 110% rule apply to pay out the husband? thanks

Also need to check what the top heavy requirements are as if the keys are required to get top heavy, some minimums may need to be allocated. As all above, the document's allocation requirements need to be checked.

For debate only, is merging considered to be termination?

Understood and thank you for your input.

I was not thinking of different schedules, just that service exclusion for the new plan. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying.

Checking a thought/curiosity as never dealt with it before nor have any idea. Company has an existing 401k/PS plan for many years. They need to add a second PS plan with better allocation provisions and then merge the new plan into the existing plan. Upon merging, will the new PS plan's benefits need to be 100% vested, assuming the new plan's vesting service will start with the inception of the plan, assuming that the new PS can even have this provision? Thank you,

Thank you all for your comments and insignt.

Bri, was your response to my or Belgrath's comment?

The plans are combo, DC+CB

Did not come across this situation before. Companies A & B are controlled group Company A sponsors plan # 001 They want to add 2 more plans but the want company B to be the sponsor Are the new plans required to be #002 and #003? Thanks

I am surprised that they were never contacted for missing 5500 forms in the past by the IRS or DoL unless they never filed in the first place. I agree with Paul that a legal counsel would be a wise a step especially where no records are available. Got to catch this before either IRS or DoL wakes up and asks for prior filings.

Thank you both for your responses.

2 hypothetical scenarios so making things up: Scenario 1: A QRP receives 105k in excess assets from a DB plan and will allocate in 7 years. It is invested in a 0% interest bearing account. Year 1 must allocate 15k (1/7th of 105k) so end of Year 1 balance is now 90k What are the Year 2 and Year 3 requirements assuming minimum will be allocated Scenario 2: Same as above with the exception it is invested in an account that will have 10% return Year 1 must allocate 15k but now end of Year 1 balance is 99k What are the Year 2 and Year 3 requirements assuming minimum will be allocated? Thanks

If 1000+ hours is already accrued (assuming the plan has 1000+ hour requirement - plz check the document) and there is no last day rule within the MPP, isn't there a 2025 contribution requirement? As Bri said, if to freeze or terminate, 204(h) notice is required. As Cusefan said, best to terminate and start a 403b plan as 401a plan may not be merged/converted into 403b plan, logically speaking. Can you run MPP and 403b concurrently? If yes, must watch for 25% deduction as well as 415(c) limits. Sorry do not remember all the MPP to PSP conversion details from 23+ years ago that was allowed with EGTRRA restatement - fuzzy memory but it was done all the time but possibly before 1000+ hour requirement.

Thank you both for clearing this up.

Hot and humid, not thinking straight. Checking a proposal for a DC/CB combo DC is 401k+SH Match+PS A previously employee claimed to be an HCE turns out to be a NHCE. Let's call him Joe Joe is excluded from CB plan and also gets on no PS under DC plan. 401k deferral generated enough SH match to exceed 3% of salary so top heavy is satisfied. Plugged this into the program and combined testing says Joe does not need to get gateway. Just checking is the program is right.

already done but you think they will not blame you anyway???

100% in agreement, thankfully a CB plan so funding is not affected. I was just looking for another solution that I may have missed/not aware of. Thank you for your comments.

MRC is satisfied which is close to the contribution amount. Increase in the schedule c due to inability to deduct will not affect MRC as it is a CB plan. No other solutions???

Hi Believe it or not, first time for this in recent memory. Sole prop filed their return 2024 on 4/15/2025 with no extension. Despite all warnings, made the pension contribution in May 2025 but took the deduction for 2024. Net c was 350k and the DB contribution was 100k and taken as a deduction on 2024 return. What can/should be done for 2024, if anything?

I am not sure amending the interest after plan terminated would work. also, there is the question of how it would affect the offset calculations.

Thank you for all your comments.