A Daily Network publication
Explore the network
Retirement Capital Daily
Independent Intelligence on Retirement Assets
Sunday, October 4, 2026The Morning Brief →Sign in
Policy & ERISA

Mandatory contributions count against the Section 415 annual additions cap

Groom Law guidance puts mandatory employee contributions inside the Section 415 annual additions count.

Groom Law attorneys have a direct answer to a question that compliance teams face: yes, mandatory employee contributions count against the Internal Revenue Code's annual additions cap. Senior counsel Kimberly Boberg, principal Kelly Geloneck, associate Emily Gerard, and principal David Levine supplied the answer in the latest installment of PLANSPONSOR's Ask the Experts series.

The guidance hinges on a distinction between two limits. Section 402(g) caps what a participant electively defers from pay each year. Section 415 caps the annual additions allocated to a participant's account, combining employee contributions, employer contributions, and forfeitures. Mandatory contributions, the Groom team writes, are employee contributions, and the code does not carve them out of the annual additions calculation. They fall on the 415 side of the line.

The confusion is understandable. The two limits govern the same accounts, appear on the same compliance calendars, and show up in the same testing software. Certain amounts are excluded from annual additions, the Groom team notes: rollover contributions and eligible catch-up contributions. Mandatory contributions are not on that list. A participant who must contribute as a condition of plan participation therefore builds annual additions through those mandatory dollars just as employer matches do.

The practical weight rests on plan sponsors and the administrators who run compliance testing. A plan with mandatory employee contributions must count them in the 415 test even when the participant defers nothing voluntarily. A worker can sit well under the 402(g) cap and still approach the 415 ceiling because mandatory dollars occupy the same headroom.

The guidance leaves correction options unstated. It does not explain what a plan should do once mandatory contributions push a participant over the 415 cap. For sponsors, the operative sentence is the one that puts mandatory contributions inside the 415 test. The 402(g) limit is a different ceiling, and it offers no relief here.

Continue your research

Save this analysis and keep the funds you follow together in My Desk.

Sign in to save articles or follow funds.
Sources & further reading
Groom Law Benefits Brief
More from Retirement Capital Daily
Policy & ERISA

IRS proposes letting Treasury create 63.36 million Trump Accounts without parental election

Draft rules would replace the March proposal by letting the Treasury Secretary open accounts automatically, and the regulations do not say which data would identify eligible children.
Policy & ERISA

Treasury moves to auto-open Trump Accounts for children with Social Security numbers

Treasury projects more than 60 million accounts will be added this year under temporary regulations that let the secretary open them on a child's behalf.
The Wrap

T. Rowe Price flags private credit in annuities as retirees hesitate to spend

Fitch puts the trailing default rate on U.S. private credit borrowers at a record 6.3%, while Prudential finds 86% of retirees hold back on spending their savings.
Elsewhere in the networkAll titles →
Every weekday · 6:30 a.m. ET

The Morning Brief

The latest from Retirement Capital Daily, in your inbox every weekday. Free.