Leaderboard

It's impossible to know, because it will depend heavily on the interest rate. If your account is gaining 5% a year it would be very different than if it were gaining 2% a year. One thing you could do, if you know you want to take a withdrawal every month for exactly 25 years, that means you will have 12 x 25 = 300 total withdrawals. In the first month, take 1/300th of the account, in the second month, take 1/299th of the remaining account, and so on. The amount of the withdrawal will fluctuate with the gains or losses in the account each month but it will be approximately level. Another option is to look into using your account balance to purchase an annuity.

Correct - ALWAYS use Employer's EIN on 5500. ONLY use Trust EIN (plan's do not get EINs but trusts do) on 1099-R and Sched R. And Bird is showing his/her age by mentioning Schedule P!

I would default to using the plan's target liability for funding purposes (or for 404 purposes). Remember the 110% must be satisfied after removing the distribution from both the assets and the liabilities.

If it's a QDRO, you have to do whatever the QDRO says, so that might limit the choices. If you are the alternate payee, many times you can just take a complete distribution and set up your own payment schedule. But if the QDRO awarded you installment payments, that's what you'll likely have to do. Too many variables for advice here, I think.

Open an account at a US Bank. Have the direct deposit go there. Then arrange a wire transfer between your banks. This is not an ERISA or retirement plan issue.

I agree with previous comments. I'd add that most, just about all, people in this situation would roll the money to an IRA and then take distributions from the IRA; generally much easier. As noted, the 401(k) might have restrictions on payouts and also might charge a fee each time. Honestly, it's a very complicated discussion without simple answers; well beyond the scope of this forum. Investment options and fees, direct and indirect, are all critical (within the plan vs. within the IRA and to get into the IRA).

While the plan might (this one is pretty grey they were allowed to make the payment at the time) have to ask for the money back if the person doesn't pay it back nothing really bad happens. The self-correction method is pretty clear. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rp-19-19.pdf' See page 38 of 125 4(b). I quote: "(b) Make-whole contribution. To the extent the amount of an Overpayment adjusted for Earnings at the plan’s earnings rate is not repaid to the plan, the employer or another person must contribute the difference to the plan. The preceding sentence does not apply when the failure arose solely because a payment was made from the plan to a participant or beneficiary in the absence of a distributable event (but was otherwise determined in accordance with the terms of the plan (for example, an impermissible in-service distribution))." So make the good faith effort to get the money back. Send the needed letters and so forth but the correction method in the end is nothing. The paid the person that was otherwise due the money except for the absence of a distributed event.

1. What does plan document say about who has the power to terminate the plan? Is it the full board? Is it someone else like VP of Finance, etc... Many times, proposed termination resolutions may not be effective if the wrong people signed the resolutions. So one would argue that the initial set of resolutions had no effect. 2. If the proper authority signed, and not too much time has passed from the effective date of the resolution, I usually don't see a problem in a rescinding resolution. I don't think the IRS or DOL are going to complain that the client changed its mind and decided to continue the plan unless there was some sort of evil or discriminatory intent behind it. 3. As far as the pre 59.5 distribution to a NHCE, I doubt again that this has an impact on the corporate resolution to rescind. Of course, now you are going to have to explain this change of heart by the plan sponsor to the NHCE and ask for the money back because of an operational failure-- plan overpayment.

Also, the plan may have a formula for providing installments and might not allow whatever schedule you would devise.

Nothing directly on point in the 1.401(a)(4)-11 Regs, but I think there is enough language in 1.401(a)(4)-11(c) to argue that the vesting schedule for the pre-merger account balances does not need to be compared for BRF purposes to the vesting schedule for post merger matching and profit sharing contributions.

Sorry, did not see that you are 61 years old. Just make sure your plan allows for installments.

To add to the above (and state the obvious), make sure that your 401(k) plan allows for installment payments that you describe and that you are eligible to begin receiving distributions from the plan.

The existence (and acceptance) of a QDRO does not inherently preclude the ability of the participant to make some type of election. Refer to the terms of the QDRO itself.

My understanding, and I could be wrong, was that if you had a no provisions and amended mid-year to a yes, it is a permanent yes until amended again. The maybe->yes is only for that one year and then reverts back to maybe (as it always has). For that reason, and to preserve the cessation without loss, we did not change our procedures for our clients in light of these new rules.

C/T = what....cross-tested? Please don't make up abbreviations; even if you think it should be obvious, it makes your post harder to read and makes readers spend time trying to figure out what you're asking instead of thinking about the answer to your question. Anyway, what you've suggested sounds fine to me. The only thing to remember is that the gateway applies before you restructure into component plans, so the NHCE in the component being tested on allocation rate still has to get at least 5%. But it sounds like you have that covered.

With SECURE a "no" is mostly the same as a "maybe" - either way you can decide up to December 1 if you're going to be 3% safe harbor for the year. But being "maybe" and providing the notice lets you do a couple of extra things - you can make an ACP safe harbor match, and (if your notice contains the "maybe not" language) you can suspend the safe harbor without the need to be operating at an economic loss. I am having a hard time figuring out when the "maybe not" would ever be useful in this situation, you would have to basically decide in October that you wanted to be safe harbor and then change your mind a couple of weeks later. Preserving the option to do an ACP safe harbor match though is likely worth the effort to provide the notice in most cases. But I wouldn't sweat it if you missed any.

Exactly. If you had a QDRO that the Plan received and acknowledged - that is, the Plan Administrator informed you that the DRO was "qualified" and hence a QDRO, and then the Plan Administrator failed to follow the terms of the QDRO then you have a legal action to bring against the Plan. You probably need to start with a formal claim for benefits and go from there. If your claim is denied, then formally appeal, and then bring suit if necessary - ERISA does make you go through a hierarchy before bringing a lawsuit, and you don't necessarily need an attorney for the claim and appeal, but may want the help just the same. Good luck!

Yes, provided the document specifies that. Note, however, if plan is top heavy that your TH minimum is based on all compensation regardless.

You really need an attorney to assist you.

I agree with David that in real life it is subject to "facts and circumstances" The only official reference that I am aware of is coming from EPCRS https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rp-19-19.pdf - See section 6.02

IMHO, it's prudent to be prepared to include interest on any retroactive payment, but not necessarily required. Nor is it obvious what interest rate(s) to use. In a nutshell, to me this is a "facts and circumstances" analysis. An important condition in this decision might be whose "fault" leads to the retroactive nature of the payment. Also, the length of time might be relevant; interest for one month? For example, suppose Joe Employee comes into work and says, "I'm retiring tomorrow". Completion of necessary paperwork (including J&S) might be lengthy enough that Joe's first payment is one or two months after his expected retirement date. One could argue that the delay is not the fault of the employer, so that no interest is payable, but there might be other conditions to evaluate also. Likely, you can think of other examples that might be useful.

The form calls for the employER id number. It is sometimes advisable to get a separate plan id number, e.g. if the plan is not on a platform and you need to report distributions on Form 1099-R. We used to put the plan number on Schedule P but that is long gone/showing my age. I think the only place now the plan id number would appear on a 5500 form is Schedule R.

It depends on what the order says. 50% of the pension can be written several different ways with vastly different outcomes.

Also welcome to the forums, ABeach.