30.  Assume a new defined contribution plan.  If a plan document defines the limitation year as the plan year and the initial plan year is a short plan year, is the document defective because it is not permissible to have a "short limitation year"?  If this is a defect, would such a drafting defect be sufficient to jeopardize the plan's qualified status?

As a practical matter, this is most likely not a problem.  We are not aware of ever saying that you cannot ever have a short limitation year.

A second question is if it is permissible to have a plan's effective date precede the existence of the plan sponsor or a predecessor entity of the plan sponsor.  Thus, if we have a  brand new entity set up on 3/1/97 with a calendar year fiscal year, can we establish a PS plan with an effective date of 1/1/97, have a full 12 month plan year, and use all compensation paid during that 12 month period (which would be limited by the fact that there is no payroll prior to 3/1), and not need to pro-rate any of the regular limits?

It seems reasonable that with proper attention to the details of the plan design (including effective dates and plan years as outlined above), the issues that are of concern in this question can be avoided.  We know of nothing that prohibits provisions such as outlined above.

This question will be further addressed from the podium.