The ICON A5 would seem to be a "conventional" (if we stretch the limits of the term) high-wing monoplane.
But what about these things right here:
The protrusions from the hull, circled in red, are called "Seawings(tm)." Their declared purpose, according to the POH, is to stabilize the aircraft in water as well as provide pilot and passenger with a means of convenient in- and egress from the cockpit.
I can't find any confirmation or denial as to whether or not they generate any kind of lift, but they do seem to be shaped in a way that could be a manner of airfoil - and certainly if you're designing an aircraft and have lateral protrusions from the hull and you don't shape them to produce lift you've missed an opportunity.
So for the moment, if we assume they do generate some modicum of lift, does that mean the ICON is no longer properly referred to as a monoplane?
My understanding is that "Biplane" would require the wings to be vertically stacked with each other. Some small portion of the seawings does underlie the main wings, but the vast majority of the seawings' structure is well forward of the main wing.
Would that make it a Tandem-Wing aircraft?
Do either of those terms stop having meaning if the seawings - which are declared as intended to provide stability in water and footing for embarking/disembarking occupants - are instead properly though of as structurally part of the hull - and thus the aircraft is at least partially a lifting body?