"We have a 401k safe harbor plan that was referred to us however they have no plan document in place. 2 participants, they started making deferrals and 3% safe harbor into the plan in 2024 and in 2025 had a rollover contribution of $500k+. Has anyone ever dealt with having no plan document? In my research, I can only find corrections for correcting missed restatements and none for entirely not having a plan document."

[Sponsored]

Modernization doesn’t need to slow you down. We help organizations manage platforms transitions, reduce risk and maintain operational stability. See how. 

"My understanding is that an HRA provided to retired or retiring employees is not subject to Section 105(h)'s nondiscrimination rules, unless one of the retired/retiring employees is a participant, where the plan must then provide the same 'type of benefits' and 'dollar limitations' for all other retired participants.

"What if the HRA plan is provided exclusively to highly compensated individuals (i.e., only retired HCIs are 'participants')? My understanding of 26 C.F.R. Section 1.105-11(c)(3)(iii) indicates that this would be permissible so long as the same type of benefits and dollar limitations are provided to all other retired participants, even if the plan's participants are made up exclusively of HCIs. Is there any IRS/Treasury guidance discussing the scope of 26 C.F.R. Section 1.105-11(c)(3)(iii)? Is there any reason to think that the above interpretation is wrong? I understand that this is inconsistent with most, if not all, other nondiscrimination rules for self-insured plans, but I'm hung up on the 'retired participants' language."

"Some Section 403(b) plans provide a participant's contribution that, although made by salary reduction, is not an elective deferral because the contribution is made as a condition of employment. (Some IRS-preapproved documents set up a specially defined term for such a Mandatory Contribution.) Internal Revenue Code Section 414(v)(7)'s constraint that a higher-wage participant's 'additional elective deferrals' must be non-Roth contributions applies only regarding elective deferrals. If an employer's information feed to a recordkeeper carefully shows distinct amounts for each of Mandatory Contributions and elective deferrals, does a recordkeeper record these in distinct subaccounts? Or, should an employer worry that a recordkeeper might flag as Section 414(v)(7)-burdened many participants whose elective deferrals did not exceed the without-catch-up limit? About this, are some recordkeepers better than others? For example, does TIAA -- because of its wide experience with higher-education employers, many of which provide these condition-of-employment contributions -- handle this more capably than other big recordkeepers?"