BenefitsLink logo
EmployeeBenefitsJobs logo
Get the BenefitsLink app for iPhone and iPad LinkedIn
Twitter
Facebook
Search the News


Featured Jobs
Retirement Plan Administrator
Temporary Retirement Plan Operations Analyst
Senior Pension Administrator
Retirement Sales Specialist
Implementation Specialist
Senior Plan Administrator
Retirement Plan Administrator
401K Administrator
Senior Retirement Plan Consultant
Retirement Plan Administrator
Search all jobs
 

 
 
 

Jump to content


Photo

pbgc coverage


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Gary

Gary

    Registered User

  • Registered
  • 1,062 posts

Posted 28 September 2011 - 04:08 PM

A professional sve employer has

8 active employees with an accrued benefit and

11 terminated vested employees with an accrued benefit

the plan has not had any accruals (not explicitly frozen, bit formula expired some years ago so no new accruals) for several years.

There are 19 additional employees who meet the plan's eligibility requirement, but of course have an accd ben of $0.

So the question is how many "active participants" are there?

Of course the PBGC premium filing instructions provide that a participant is someone that has a benefit liability (whether active or inactive).

So on that basis there would be 8 active participants and 11 inactive participants.

But is that the proper definition for "active participant" when determining number of active participants in order to determine if a plan is covered by pbgc.

Any comments supported with a cite of course
thanks

#2 david rigby

david rigby

    Moderator

  • Sitewide Moderator
  • 2,693 posts

Posted 28 September 2011 - 04:18 PM

...not explicitly frozen, bit formula expired some years ago so no new accruals

I'm not familiar with "expired". Can you provide some more information?
I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments or advice is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, certainly not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial advice.

#3 Gary

Gary

    Registered User

  • Registered
  • 1,062 posts

Posted 28 September 2011 - 04:36 PM

the formula was 5% of compensation for the 2007 and 2008 plan years only.

So after 2008 there is no "active" formula.

I don't want to go off on a tangent.

For practical purposes the formula is frozen but the plan does not explicitly provide that new participants cannot enter plan; albeit they will have no accrual.
thanks.

#4 Quagmire

Quagmire

    Registered User

  • Registered
  • 30 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 10:17 AM

the formula was 5% of compensation for the 2007 and 2008 plan years only.

So after 2008 there is no "active" formula.

I don't want to go off on a tangent.

For practical purposes the formula is frozen but the plan does not explicitly provide that new participants cannot enter plan; albeit they will have no accrual.
thanks.


See 4006.6. As per the instructions, I'd interpret this to mean that a per-participant premium is not owed for anyone with an accrued benefit of $0. I didn't read through the Examples and they're probably not relevant to your question, but you should read them to be sure.

See also 4001.2 Benefit liabilities.

If you hover your cursor over a link, a text box with the first sentence of that link will appear. Pull your cursor down into that box and click to open the link in a new window. You can open as many of these boxes as you want and read them side-by-side.


Quagmire
www.regulationdocs.com

#5 Hojo

Hojo

    Registered User

  • Registered
  • 95 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 11:56 AM

Has anyone had any recent experience with this?  We have a plan with 10 participants who are $0 benefitting and 20 with >$0 benefitting, but want to be covered by the PBGC.