Quantech and 410(b) test.

[R. Butler]

I use Quantech 6.0. I am working on a non-standard age weighted profit sharing plan. Two employees terminate with less than 500 hours so I don't include them in 410(B). When I tests Quantech correctly identifies the employees included in coverage tests under 410(B), however, when Quantech actually runs the tests it includes the 2 people who termed with less than 500 hours.

Has anyone run into this problem? If so, how do I fix?

Thanks for any help.

[Guest]

is it actually including them or simply showing them on the report? Something broke somewhere, and I have seen them on the report (401(a)(4)) but not actually included.

If plan is coded in specs that post tax contributions are allowed, they will show up as well. Or of plan has an old post tax contribution account, they will show up because the system thinks they could have made a post tax contributions. or if plan is coded as 401(k), they will show up as well because it thinks they could have deferred. (on the avg ben % test)

[R. Butler]

Specs inadvertently indicated post tax contributions were allowed.

I did notice something else kind of quirky. When I de-selected "post tax contributions" it got of rid of the two it should have, but it also fails to "list" non-excludables that do not benefit. It includes them in the calculations, but it does not list them. It took me half an hour to realize that people were factored in the test, but not listed.

[Guest]

unfortunately with 6.0 the ees who are includable and not benefiting are not in the ee list, but they are included in the totals.

For others who are reading this:

only 4 NHCEs are printed by name, but then in the totals it says there are 6 employees in the group. It drives me crazy.

There are two other possible problems to watch out for:

1: with a 401k plan, you must check the box 'show 401k/401m data' - I have had different results by checking this. it didn't use to be that way, Qtech is aware of the problem and is working on the fix.

2: if you have immediate eligibility for deferral but a waiting period for match or profit sharing the results could be out of wack. I have had to take out the waiting period in specs after running things to make the avg ben % test work.

[Guest Jennifer Garvin]

Another quirk for plans that have excluded divisions: During eligibility, Relius gives an employee a "reason not eligible" as "member of excluded division" before checking to see if they have satisfied the age and serivce requrirements. Therefore, employees who are members of an excluded division but do not meet the age and service requirements are included in the 410(B) and 401(a)(4) tests as non-benefitting non-excludables. The programmers tell us that they are aware of this problem, but don't have any immediate plans to correct it. It's not high on their priority list. (?!?!)

[Guest]

thanks for that information. I hadn't heard about that one.

my gripe is not so much about bugs, no software is always going to be able to handle everything the first time, but I have a problem with not being kept informed of known problems. I had hoped their web site would keep us abreast on known problems, but only certain ones seem to make it there.