Leaderboard

I knew I saw something. In the Form 5500 book by Janice Wegesin, she states that the definition of a one participant plan changed effective with 2009 plan years. Here is the following language from the book and the code she cites: PPA 2006 modified the term partner to include an individual who owns more than 2% of an S-corporation. See IRS 1372b or PPA 2006 section 1103(a(E).

If he is not going to sign, then delete the signature lines. You are either going to court with a request in which you both agree to issuance of the order in the form presented (sometimes called a "stipulated order" because both of the parties have stipulated that the order is acceptable) or you are going by yourself without assent of your former spouse. With assent of both parties, the court will almost certainly approve without further consideration. Without the assent of both parties, the court may inquire into the history and terms of the the prior judgments and orders in the domestic relations proceeding and my require formal notice to the former spouse and opportunity for him to appear to contest the proposed action. The deletion of the signature lines is not a big deal if he is not going to sign. Having a form with the appearance of unfulfilled requirements or unfinished business just asks for questions and is unsatisfying. This is all about court procedure and nothing about the substance of the order or the fine points of form of the order, except for the court's inherent curiosity about whether or not the terms of the order are proper in light of the terms of the property settlement. Assent by both parties resolves the question. The retirement plan has no knowledge about the court procedures and considerations. Most of the plan's model document involves matters that have nothing to do with qualification of the order or following local court rules and procedures. You should press on. If he remarries or dies before your interest in the plan is secured by a QDRO, that interest may be compromised. And that reminds me to warn you that the plan's model document may not be adequate to provide you with the expected benefit under the plan. Fifty percent of the benefit seems like a simple concept, but there are other important matters to address, especially under pension plans. The plan's model was not drafted for your benefit. If anything, models tend to favor participants. I repeat my recommendation for competent legal help, even if the idea of paying again is painful. Addendum: The model QDRO is probably OK if nothing unusual happens: You get the QDRO squared away before the participant dies remarries, retires, or dies, and you do not start benefits before the participant retires early with a subsidy. On the other hand, unless you hire a lawyer who is competent with respect to these matters, the lawyer will not understand the technical aspects of these concerns and will do you no good. The average divorce lawyer is not competent with respect to pension plan QDROs. You might be losing nothing or not much if the the unusual matters are not addressed properly, or you might lose everything. For example, if the participant dies before you start your benefit and the order does not expressly award you an interest in the plan's death benefits, you could get nothing from the plan. And this has nothing to do with signing the order.

I think they just don't want to process any reversals, which the participant is entitled to.