Unrelated Employers and Code Section 415

My understanding has always been that the Section 415 limits are independent for a participant who works for two unrelated employers.  To clarify, Employer A has a plan and the HCE participant has a $55,000 Section 415 limit for 2018 in the plan.  Unrelated Employer B (no controlled group or affiliated service group) has a plan and the same HCE participant has a $55,000 Section 415 limit for 2018 in the plan.  There is no combined limit. 

At the 2018 ASPPA conference, I was in a session that was addressing this issue and the presenter said that even if the employers are unrelated BUT there is common ownership of more than 50% between the unrelated employers, then there was a combined 415 limit.  I am unable to locate anything in any of my research.  Does anyone know anything about this?  Did I mishear what was said?  Does anyone have a reference that I can read?  Is this in the EOB? 

415(h)

Quote

50 percent control

For purposes of applying subsections (b) and (c) of section 414 to this section, the phrase “more than 50 percent” shall be substituted for the phrase “at least 80 percent” each place it appears in section 1563(a)(1).

7 hours ago, buckaroo said:

My understanding has always been that the Section 415 limits are independent for a participant who works for two unrelated employers.  To clarify, Employer A has a plan and the HCE participant has a $55,000 Section 415 limit for 2018 in the plan.  Unrelated Employer B (no controlled group or affiliated service group) has a plan and the same HCE participant has a $55,000 Section 415 limit for 2018 in the plan.  There is no combined limit. 

At the 2018 ASPPA conference, I was in a session that was addressing this issue and the presenter said that even if the employers are unrelated BUT there is common ownership of more than 50% between the unrelated employers, then there was a combined 415 limit.  I am unable to locate anything in any of my research.  Does anyone know anything about this?  Did I mishear what was said?  Does anyone have a reference that I can read?  Is this in the EOB? 

That  is absolutely true; but I would not call them unrelated any more if common ownership exceeds 50%. The EMPLOYERS (not necessarily the PEOPLE) are now related.