Jakyasar Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago 401k/SH match/PS combo with CB plans. Top heavy is provided by DC plan. PS allocation is everyone in their own group. Plans are top heavy. DC plan eligibility for all sources is age 18 and 6 months with entry 1st of month following completion of 6 months service. CB plan is 21/1 with dual entry. Gateway is required at 7.5%. During 2025, the TPA handling the DC plan changed the provisions unbeknownst to me: Removed last day and hour requirement for PS contribution Made top heavy requirement 5% defined contribution minimum as written in the document for combo plans. For top heavy, must be employed on last day. No SECURE 2.0 amendment for "no top heavy for otherwise excludable employees". A few different questions as I confused myself (do not work with SH match in combo plans in general): For an HCE but non-key who is excluded from CB plan categorically: HCE made a deferral and received 4% SH match, but they do not want to allocate any profit sharing. What is the top-heavy requirement? Do I need to provide additional 5% PS allocation? For non-HCE employees who became eligible during 2025 due to 6 months eligibility: Employee enters the plan during the year after 6 months of service Terminated before EOY Made deferral and received 4% match Not in CB due to 1 year wait Do I need to provide 5% top-heavy PS allocation? How about for the same employee who was employes at EOY? I so confused myself here as I have not seen a document written this way. Thank you QKA, QKC, QPA, CBS - I used to be indecisive about pensions but now I am not so sure
Bri Posted 22 minutes ago Posted 22 minutes ago Well, is your SECURE 2.0 amendment going to operationally reflect the no THMs for otherwise excludables? If not, then you'll want to review exactly how that 5% is spelled out. Is it 5 because the document says everyone gets 5, or is it because the plan says anyone who needs to get 5 will get 5? That first HCE in theory should only need a 3% THM, already covered by the match they got. But the document might have been written to force the 5 upon the guy. Kinda would need to see more of how much the THM is written as an override to the other provisions.
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