"A plan sponsor is looking to adopt a retroactive amendment effective 1/1/25 to change their safe harbor match plan to be a safe harbor nonelective (3%) plan, primarily because of the gateway test benefits for their profit sharing. Are they legally allowed to reclassify the safe harbor match contributions they made from 1/1/25 to now as non-elective, essentially using it as a kind of credit when they true up at the end of the year? That would result in everyone having gotten a 3% contribution for the plan year. On one hand, my instincts say that adopting the amendment as of 1/1/25 would mean the safe harbor match provisions would no longer have been in place, so it wouldn't have to stay as match, but on the other hand it feels like it could be sketchy as it was made under a different contribution source structure. Anyone have insight on this?"

"In determining whether a one-participant plan has exceeded the 250,000 threshold, all one-participant plans of the *employer* must be aggregated. Does the *employer* include members of an affiliate service group? There are one participant plans sponsored by different members of an affiliated service group. Citations to the statutes or instructions are helpful but not necessary."

"Provider is telling us that we cannot change the investment provider mid-year. So for example, let's assume it is February and the pan sponsor wants to move from Fidelity to Charles Schwab (neither Fidelity nor Schwab are involved here they are just an example). We are being told nope not an option you can't leave us until January 1 next year. I believe it has something to do maybe with form 5305. even if there is something that is technically true about this it just seems bizarre that a sponsor would be hamstrung from making a change for better pricing / service because of a technicality. Have others heard of this? Are they being too literal or risk averse? This would basically mean the sales process for SIMPLEs is shut down for the first 7 or 8 months of the year."