changing eligibility requirements

[Draper55]

What are the issues if plan eligibility requirements are liberalized to accommodate a family member and then switched back at a later point in time? 

 

[justanotheradmin]

Is the family member HCE? Is the plan only HCEs? such as a small owner only plan?
it would be something to analyze as a benefits, rights, and features non-discrimination issue. 

But if the plan is 100% HCE or 100% NHCE maybe BRF testing would pass just fine. 

There are a variety of examples that illustrate the BFR analysis should consider not only the provision change itself, but the timing of a provision change, as well as who would benefit. 
For example - adding a loan provision for a short period just for an HCE to be able to take a loan - and then removing the loan provision some short time (how short?) later, would easily be problematic. 

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, is it a duck?

[Draper55]

Looking back at the reg I think it could be considered a timing of plan  amendments issue more than a BRF issue.  There is an existing NHCE and two HCEs including the prospective participant. Future NHCES could be hurt if they cannot earn the same benefits due to a delayed entry so I suppose it could be construed as discriminatory depending perhaps on how much time has elapsed since the entry restrictions were liberalized to allow the family member to join earlier.  Thank you for your insights...