415-paired DB plans

[VeryOldMan]

This is a theoretical question but with possible relevance to one of our clients.  Plan A is a db that is has been around for >5 years, has a 10% per year accrual.  A is very overfunded, and client wants to adopt a new DB to gain some additional deductions for year X. Plan B is adopted at the end of year X and provides that the 415 limit is first applied to plan B. Plan A is not frozen.  As a result the benefit that employee X would have accrued in plan A for year X is now reduced due to the 415 limits. Plan A was not yet amended to state that the 415 limit is applied secondary to the new plan. For the year in question all participants are 5% owners.  Is this a 411(d)(6) cutback, since the benefit in plan A for year X was fully accrued the day before  plan B is adopted and will now be reduced. My understanding has always been that 415 limitations are not 411(d)(6) issues. 

 1. Is this 415 restriction considered a 411 issue? 2. If Plan A was also amended in yr X to state that 415 limit is applied secondary to plan B, would that amendment give rise to a 204(h) notice?  3. Does the adoption of the new plan require a 204(h) notice for employees in plan A?  Would appreciate some feedback on this one!

[Effen]

Come on.  Seriously?  What is the point of Plan B if Plan A is already funding a benefit at the 415 limit?  What is the saying...pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered.   If the client cares more about deductions than they do actually being able to get money out of the plan, maybe Old Ned Ryerson has a 412(e) plan for them.