Operational failure. Otherwise eligible employees (all NHCEs) have been included in the plan, before they met the minimum service requirement in the 401(k) prototype plan document. The money was deposited in the plan and sat in cash for a few months. EPCRS seems to say this can be self-corrected by retroactively amending the plan to permit those employees to enter the plan. [1] The example correction in Rev. Proc 2016-51 provides for SCP by retroactive amendment, but also includes the submission of the amendment to the IRS for a determination letter. This would no longer be an option beginning 1/1/2017, correct? [2] Earnings would need to be applied. Because these employees never directed their investments, this would be based on the default fund provided in the plan, correct? [3] What if instead the facts were that an error had been made in which only some of the otherwise eligible employees (all NHCEs) were included prior to meeting the plan's minimum service requirement? Could this be self-corrected through SCP by only including those who had been let in early, or would that scenario require a VCP submission?

[Advert.]

WEB members represent more than 25 professions and 30 areas of expertise within the pension and benefits industry -- administrators, consultants, attorneys, accountants, investment managers, communications experts and benefits managers. Join today.

Does a safe harbor floor offset arrangement in which the two plans are not permissively aggregated, and thus treated as two separate plans, required to have the same plan year for both the DB and DC? In 1.401(a)(4)-8, it doesn't seem to be one of the requirements of a safe harbor design. If not, can I still test the rate groups prior to the offset and the AB% test net of the offset?

Company A wants to add a profit sharing element to the existing 401(k) plan. They want the vesting date for the profit sharing to be different from the employer match piece. The want the vesting date to begin on the effective date of when the profit sharing element is added and exclude all prior years of service. I don't think this is allowed due to Code section 411. Correct?

DB plan failed to adopt a good faith PPA amendment or a 436 amendment. Also, the plan adopted its PPA restatement late and did not submit the plan for a PPA determination letter. The plan received a favorable EGTRRA letter after entering a Closing Agreement with IRS regarding other late amendments (which ultimately were adopted under the Closing Agreement). I can't find guidance on how to submit these failures for correction through VCP. I know I can correct the nonamender failure as to the 436 amendment. However, given that the plan has been restated for PPA, do I need to correct the good faith PPA-non-amender failure, or would that failure be considered "corrected" by the (late) PPA restatement? Should I just submit the 436 non-amender and the late PPA restatement as non-amender failures and leave it at that? Also, since the IRS has stopped accepting determination letter applications (except in limited circumstances that aren't present here), is there a "failure" for submitting a PPA determination letter request late?

A potential client has an existing defined benefit plan and would like to add a 401(k) Plan. His current TPA does not want anything to do with adding a 401(k) plan. Are there any pitfalls to adding a 401k plan to an existing defined benefit plan?

Is it acceptable to co-mingle Roth contributions with regular salary deferrals in a single investment account? I think it is, if each source is kept separate when performing the annual accounting -- meaning that the plan would allocate earnings proportionately. Correct? A citation?

We have a client who requested a plan termination due to acquisition effective December 18, 2017. Plan Year end is 9/30 and is a safe harbor plan. Termination paperwork has been signed. We informed the client that the plan can still be safe harbor for a short final plan year if the plan termination is in connection with a 410(b)(6)(C) transaction. Yesterday we heard from the client that the acquisition date has been pushed back to March 2018 due to insurance issues and that employees will continue to be paid by the current plan sponsor until then. Our concern is that the termination date is earlier than the acquisition date and that the plan is now subject to ADP Testing and Top Heavy. What are your thoughts regarding this? Do we need to change the termination date of the plan to March in order to satisfy the acquisition exception?

Plan document says the measuring period for a "break in service" for eligibility is the 12 months period that starts on the first day of employment. Example: No vested account balance; hired 3/4/2008; terminated 5/15/2009; rehired 7/5/12; terminated 6/20/2015; then rehired 11/29/17. (And still employed as of today.) What date do I use to start my measuring period for counting a "break in service"?