"I know I am reaching on this, but could you start a safe harbor match effective 1/1/2022 with the notice going out as late as 12/13/2021? I know that the rules for proper employee notification would require that notice to be distributed no later than 12/1, but is that a 'safe harbor (so-to-speak)' notice deadline? If the safe harbor match notice is given after that date and if the eligible participants then still have enough time to make a decision, receive education material, ask questions, and are ready to go by January 1, 2022, can that still be considered valid enough to have the safe harbor effective 1/1/2022? For a small group of employees, this could probably be done. But would it be considered valid?"

"We're drafting Cycle 3 docs for a PSPs that are receiving excess assets from a terminated DB Plan. Under FIS the plan provides that excess assets from a terminated DB can be transferred over. Does this require the distribution options to include J&S provisions? These PSPs previously paid out lump sum only. The J&S provisions would be required if Money Purchase Plan assets were being transferred or merged, but I don't believe it is required for excess assets from a terminated pension plan. Is this correct?"

"We have a client implementing a 6-month accrual rule for their Cash Balance plan and would like to have the same 6 month requirement for their Profit Sharing Plan. Is it even possible to have a 6-month elapsed time rule in place of the normal 1000 hours? Haven't seen anything yet on this issue."

"This may be basic but I just wanted to make sure no employees get inadvertently excluded. Company A is 100% owned by John; Company B is 100% owned by Fred; John and Fred each have 50% ownership in Company C. All three companies refer business to each other and work together in providing services to common clients. If Company A wants to sponsor a qualified plan, all three companies would be members of an ASG and would have to all be covered by Company A's plan -- is that correct?"

"Son is 100% owner of corp. Father over 70½ has been taking RMDs since 70½. New broker is advising that Father doesn't need RMDs because he's not an owner and is still working, and says Son's 100% stock ownership is not attributed to Father. I think it would have been in best interests of client for broker to keep his mouth shut before volunteering info to client w/o checking with TPA first. Agree?"

"I have the formula to calculate a 'regular' EBAR. That is, not including permitted disparity. Where can I find the formula for the permitted disparity? Does anyone have Excel formulae to calculate either the EBAR given a contribution, or the contribution given the EBAR?"

"My former employer was acquired. The acquiring organization (where I currently work) provides a new 401k plan through a different provider. I want to withdraw my assets in my former employer's 401k. Can I do it, or would there be a mandatory rollover to the new 401k?

"Wife owns 100% of a recently acquired business. Husband owns 89% of his business; the other 11% is an unrelated owner (a niece). Minor child is age 15. Wife is on husband's payroll but will remove him to limit the only block to the spousal exception being the minor child.

One piece I read by a major insurer indicated that if the parent (husband in this case) ownership was less than 80% there would be no problem (i.e., spousal exception could apply). I think that, in this situation, unless the father's interest goes down to 50% or less, the child still has effective control of both businesses (>50%) by attribution and there is effective control of each corp by five or fewer individuals. Is my reasoning correct?

A related question: when determining controlling interest post-family attribution, does one count the attributed ownership more than once so that the total ownership can be more than 100%? I haven't seen any examples that show how this is done."

"We are looking at taking on a new client for 2022. They have an existing 401k plan; non-safe harbor. In reviewing the adoption agreement and plan document, the current TPA drafted an amendment in 2021 that provided a waiver of eligibility for one specific NHCE participant. The reason being is that participant was allowed into the plan before they were eligible (not eligible until 1/1/2022) and made salary deferrals to the plan in 2021. I've never heard of this approach of a waiver for a single NHCE employee; thoughts?"