Reg. § 1.414(r)-8 Separate application of section 410(b).

Example 2. The facts are the same as in Example 1. All of the 50 highly compensated employees treated as employees of Line 2 benefit under Plan Y, and 80 of the 100 nonhighly compensated employees treated as employees of Line 2 benefit under Plan Y. Thus, Plan Y benefits 50 percent of all Employer A's highly compensated employees (50 out of 100) and only 4 percent of all Employer A's nonhighly compensated employees (80 out of 2,000). Thus, while Plan Y has a ratio percentage of 80 percent (80% ÷ 100%) on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis, it has a ratio percentage of only 8 percent (4% ÷ 50%) on an employer-wide basis. See § 1.410(b)-9. Under § 1.410(b)-4(c)(4)(iii), the nonhighly compensated employee concentration percentage is 2,000/2,100 or 95 percent. Because 8 percent is less than 20 percent (the unsafe harbor percentage applicable to Employer A under § 1.410(b)-4(c)(4)(ii)), Plan Y does not satisfy the nondiscriminatory classification test of § 1.410(b)-4 on an employer-wide basis. Nor does Plan Y satisfy the ratio percentage test of § 1.410(b)-2(b)(2) on an employer-wide basis, since 8 percent is less than 70 percent. Under these facts, Plan Y does not satisfy section 410(b)(5)(B) on an employer-wide basis in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section for the plan year of Plan Y beginning in the 1994 testing year, and therefore fails to satisfy section 410(b) for that year. This is true even though Plan Y satisfies section 410(b) on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis in accordance with paragraph (b)(3) of this section.

Example 3. The facts are the same as in Example 2, except that all of the employees treated as employees of Line 2 benefit under Plan Y. Thus, Plan Y benefits 50 percent of all of Employer A's highly compensated employees (50 out of 100) and 5 percent of all of Employer A's nonhighly compensated employees (100 out of 2,000). Plan Y therefore has a ratio percentage of 100 percent (100% ÷ 100%) on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis and a ratio percentage of 10 percent (5% ÷ 50%) on an employer-wide basis. Because Plan Y has a ratio percentage of at least 90 percent on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis, a reduced unsafe harbor percentage applies to Plan Y under paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(A) of this section. The reduced unsafe harbor percentage applicable to Plan Y is 8.75 percent because Employer A's nonhighly compensated employee concentration percentage is 95 percent. Plan Y's employer-wide ratio percentage of 10 percent therefore exceeds the unsafe harbor percentage. Plan Y thus satisfies section 410(b)(5)(B) on an employer-wide basis in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section for the plan year of Plan Y beginning in the 1994 testing year. Plan Y also satisfies section 410(b) on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis in accordance with paragraph (b)(3) of this section.

Example 4. The facts are the same as in Example 3, except that Employer A's total nonexcludable nonhighly compensated employees are 2,500 (rather than 2,000), of whom 100 are treated as employees of Line 2 and of whom 90 benefit under Plan Y. Plan Y has a ratio percentage of 90 percent (90% ÷ 100%) on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis, and Employer A's nonhighly compensated employee concentration percentage is 2,500/2,600 or 96 percent. Thus, the reduced unsafe harbor percentage applicable to Plan Y under paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(A) of this section is 8 percent. Plan Y benefits 50 percent of all of Employer A's highly compensated employees (50 out of 100) and 3.6 percent of all of Employer A's nonhighly compensated employees (90 out of 2,500). Plan Y therefore has a ratio percentage of only 7.2 percent (3.6% ÷ 50%) on an employer-wide basis, which falls below the reduced unsafe harbor percentage of 8 percent. Nonetheless, under paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(B) of this section, Plan Y will be deemed to satisfy section 410(b)(5)(B) on an employer-wide basis if the Commissioner determines that, on the basis of all of the relevant facts and circumstances, the plan benefits such employees as qualify under a classification of employees that does not discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees.

Example 5.

(i) The facts are the same as in Example 1, except that Plan X benefits only 950 of the employees of Line 1. Assume Plan X satisfies the reasonable classification requirement of § 1.410(b)-4(b) on an employer-wide basis. Plan X benefits 50 percent of all Employer A's highly compensated employees (50 out 100) and 47.5 percent of all Employer A's nonhighly compensated employees (950 out of 2,000). Plan X consequently has a ratio percentage determined on an employer-wide basis of 95 percent (47.5% ÷ 50%), see § 1.410(b)-9, and thus satisfies section 410(b)(5)(B) on an employer-wide basis.

(ii) Plan X has a ratio percentage determined on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis of 50 percent (50% ÷ 100%). Because 50 percent is less than 70 percent, Plan X must satisfy the nondiscriminatory classification test of § 1.410(b)-4 and the average benefit percentage test of § 1.410(b)-5 on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis in order to satisfy the other requirements of section 410(b). Plan X satisfies the nondiscriminatory classification requirement of § 1.410(b)-4(c) on a qualified-separate-line-of-business because its ratio percentage determined on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis is more than 22.25 percent, the safe harbor percentage applicable to Line 1 under § 1.410(b)-4(c)(4)(i). Because Plan X satisfies the reasonable classification requirement of § 1.410(b)-4(b) on an employer-wide basis, it is also deemed to satisfy this requirement on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis. See § 1.410(b)-7(c)(5). In determining whether Plan X satisfies the average benefit percentage test of § 1.410(b)-5, only Plan X and only employees of Line 1 are taken into account. See §§ 1.410(b)-6(e) and 1.410(b)-7(e).

Example 6. The facts are the same as in Example 2, except that, prior to the 1994 testing year, Employer A merges Plan X and Plan Y so that they form a single plan within the meaning of section 414(l). Under the definition of “plan” in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, however, the portion of the newly merged plan that benefits employees of Line 2 (former Plan Y) is still treated as a separate plan from the portion of the newly merged plan that benefits employees of Line 1 (former Plan X). The portion of the newly merged plan that benefits employees of Line 2 (former Plan Y) fails to satisfy section 410(b) for the reasons stated in Example 2. Under these facts, because the portion of the newly merged plan that benefits employees of Line 2 fails to satisfy section 410(b), the entire newly merged plan fails to satisfy section 410(b) for the plan year of the newly merged plan that begins in the 1994 testing year. See paragraph (d)(5) of this section.

Example 1. Employer B is treated as operating qualified separate lines of business for purposes of section 410(b) in accordance with § 1.414(r)-1(b) for the 1993 testing year. Employer B operates two qualified separate lines of business as determined under § 1.414(r)-1(b)(2), Line 1 and Line 2. Employer B maintains Plan Z, which benefits employees in both Line 1 and Line 2. Under the definition of “plan” in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, the portion of Plan Z that benefits employees of Line 1 is treated as a separate plan from the portion of Plan Z that benefits employees of Line 2. Under this paragraph (c), this result applies for purposes of both section 410(b) and section 401(a)(4).

Example 2. The facts are the same as in Example 1, except that Plan Z benefits solely employees of Line 1. In testing Plan Z under section 401(a)(4) for the plan year of Plan Z beginning in the 1993 testing year, Employer B restructures Plan Z into several component plans (within the meaning of § 1.401(a)(4)-9(c)). Under § 1.401(a)(4)-9(c)(1), each of these component plans is required to satisfy section 410(b). This paragraph (c) requires that each of the component plans be tested separately with respect to the employees of each qualified separate line of business operated by Employer B. This testing must be done in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section. Consequently, each component plan must satisfy section 410(b)(5)(B) on an employer-wide basis in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section and must also satisfy section 410(b) on a qualified-separate-line-of-business basis in accordance with paragraph (b)(3) of this section.

Example 3. The facts are the same as in Example 1, except that Plan Z is a profit-sharing plan, and contributions to Plan Z are made pursuant to cash or deferred arrangement in which all employees of Employer B are eligible to participate. Assume that, as a result, Plan Z satisfies the requirements to be tested under the special rule for employer-wide plans in § 1.414(r)-1(c)(2)(ii). Under these facts, the requirements of sections 410(b), 401(a)(4) and 401(k), including the actual deferral percentage test of section 401(k)(3) and § 1.401(k)-1(b), would generally be required to be applied separately to the portions of Plan Z that benefit the employees of Line 1 and Line 2, respectively. However, if Plan Z is tested under the special rule in § 1.414(r)-1(c)(2)(ii), these requirements must be applied on an employer-wide basis.