K2retire Posted December 9, 2015 Posted December 9, 2015 Client is considering amending to add a fixed match with no allocation conditions, and adding a last day requirement to receive their discretionary match. This would not be a safe harbor match. They have asked if they could amend or remove the fixed match mid-year in the event that they have cash flow issues. Assuming they could pass benefits rights and features by making sure the HCEs don't front load their deferrals before such a change, would such an amendment be allowed?
BG5150 Posted December 11, 2015 Posted December 11, 2015 Why not just have 2 different discretionary matches? One with a last day rule and one without. QKA, QPA, CPC, ERPATwo wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.
K2retire Posted December 11, 2015 Author Posted December 11, 2015 That is exactly what they want to do, but I didn't think it was possible. The document has a choice of yes or no for matching allocation conditions and I don't see an option to add a second match with different provisions, unless one is a safe harbor match.
BG5150 Posted December 14, 2015 Posted December 14, 2015 Find a new document. QKA, QPA, CPC, ERPATwo wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.
K2retire Posted December 14, 2015 Author Posted December 14, 2015 Unfortunately, I don't get to make the decisions about which document software we use.
Tom Poje Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 but then of course, I'm sure the following rule probably applies It's not my job to run the train, The whistle I don't blow. It's not my job to say how far The train's supposed to go. I'm not allowed to pull the brake, Or even ring the bell. But let the damn thing leave the track And see who catches hell! K2retire 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now