QMACs in ADP test

[Guest jae3207]

In order to take advantage of shifting QMACs to the adp test or borrowing elective deferrals to the acp test, does a plan need to contain language in order to do so? Most plan documents I have seen contain language which defines how an ADR or ACR is calculated and what money types are to be taken into account respectively, but because it is a testing methodology I am not sure it needs to be defined in the document.?\

thoughts?

[Tom Poje]

I haven't checked the wording of the new regs but I recall the old regs saying something like "if the document allows..."

Usually the document would say something like (ACP test ..and those deferrals not used in the ADP test...)

ceratinly you can't simply move a discretionary match to the ADP test because you have vesting and everything else associated with it. That definitely has to be a QMAC.

exactly how does your document describe what is used in the ACP test? If it is very restrictive and only says Match and after tax, I thinkk it is time to amend to better language.

[Guest jae3207]

We have an amendment which states that the match will be 100% vested as of a certain date. The ACR calculation only includes match, after-tax and if any QNECs. Also, the hardship withdrawal language indicates that a particiant can take a portion of their vested account.

If the plan is operating the match like a QMAC(e.g. full vesting and restricting this source for pre-59.5 distributions), but the document does not spell out that matching contributions will be qualified nor contain language to allow a shift of these $'s to the adp:

1) is it technically a QMAC

2) if it is a QMAC can it be shifted without flexible document language (I think you answered this question, but I just want to clarify)

[Tom Poje]

I don't think a document has to specify which test a QMAc would be used - it is simply that you can use QMACs to satisfy either ADP or ACP as long as as you don't use the same in both tests. hence, you could split a QMAC and use part here and part there.

and yes, just because a match is 100% vested does not necessarily make it a QMAC.

now, the definitions to the regs 1.401(k)-6 provide teh following definition

QMAC means

matching contributions......

satisfy (k)-1© and (d) as though the contributions were elective contributions

(to me that says 'in all other aspects they are like deferrals...vesting and withdrawal rules)

whether or not they are actually used in the AP or ACP test

in addition, such matches are forfeitable if as a result of being a match with respect to excess deferral, excess contribution or excess aggregate contribution.

so based on that, it sounds like you can do what you want (if you have described your document thouroughly)

If you document describes the ADP test as consisting of all deferrals then I dont think you could use the match.

[Guest jae3207]

The document actually defines the calculation of ADRs to include elective contributions and if any, QNECs that are not treated as matching contributions. There is no mention of QMACs or matching contributions for purposes of ADP testing.