Loren D. Stark Company
|
Hessel & Associates, LLC
|
Primark Benefits
|
Aimpoint Pension
|
Manager - Defined Contribution Plans M2B Retirement Consulting LLC
|
EPIC RPS
|
Senior Defined Contribution Account Manager Nova 401(k) Associates
|
Jocelyn Pension Consulting
|
MGKS
|
Site Manager / Senior Administrator Nicholas Pension Consultants
|
CMC Pension Professionals
|
United Benefit Pensions Inc.
|
Hicks Pension Services
|
Director of Pension Administration Primark Benefits
|
Loren D. Stark Company
|
Retirement, LLC
|
Retirement Plan Relationship Manager â DB or DC Focus Trinity Pension Consultants
|
401(k) Retirement Plan Administrator Midwest TPA with Remote Workforce
|
“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”
-- An attorney subscriber
|
|
Question 146: The proposed 414(m) regulations say that you use the attribution rules of Code Section 267(c) in determining whether an ASG exists. But Code Section 414(m) refers to the attribution rules of Code Section 318(a). Which is right? Why is there a difference? |
Answer: The first question is easy. Given a choice between the Code and the Regulations, you are almost always right in choosing the Code, and you are certainly right to do so here. The ASG rules do use the attribution system of Section 318. |
Answers are provided as general guidance on the subjects covered in the question and are not provided as legal advice to the questioner or to readers. Any legal issues should be reviewed by your legal counsel to apply the law to the particular facts of this and similar situations.
The law in this area changes frequently. Answers are believed to be correct as of the posting dates shown. The completeness or accuracy of a particular answer may be affected by changes in the law (statutes, regulations, rulings, court decisions, etc.) that occur after the date on which a particular Q&A is posted.
Related links: |