Leaderboard

rocknrolls2 was correct - the trust requirement was added after Orange County, CA (not just the City of Long Branch) filed for bankruptcy. All kinds of stories how judges' accounts were attached because in bank accounts (with high interest rates). Interesting because City of Bridgeport, CT declared bankruptcy before that and no Congressional action. Custodial accounts and annuities satisfy requirements of 457(g). It was not providers who required it was Congress.

Yeah, SECA tax should be $17,656.43 with the 50% deduction at $8,828.21, net SE income before PS of $116,132.79, and then 25% PS at $23,226.56.

My recollection was that Section 457 was initially intended to permit a non-qualified retirement plan for governmental entities. The reason for this was because private employers can immediately deduct contributions to qualified plans but cannot deduct contributions to non-qualified plans until the participant has to include the contribution into his/her income. For governments, there is no deduction permitted because they are tax-exempt. The 1986 Tax Reform Act extended 457s to non-governmental tax-exempt entities. Because only rabbi trusts, the assets of which must be subject to the claims of the employer's general creditors, were then allowed. In the 1990s, the bankruptcy or insolvency of a governmental entity prompted Congress to enact legislation providing for the imposition of a trust requirement for governmental eligible employers (I think it might have been the City of Long Branch, CA). See Public Law 104-188, Section 1448(a)

If it's over $5K in a DB or CB plan you couldn't do a rollover, you'd need to buy an annuity based on the Plan's normal form. If the Plan is a terminating non-PBGC DB Plan, see PBGC Form MP-300 and Instructions - Missing Participant Program Plan Information for Small Professional Service DB Plans

Large company with existing traditional DB plan, so you have a current actuary and given your size, would assume it is a large consulting firm actuary and (hopefully) not a bundled insurance company arrangement. Your actuary should be willing and able to elaborate the pros and cons of converting to a cash balance arrangement, both in general and specific to your organization, as well as with respect to your employees - and for little or no fee. When you get into modeling potential conversion formulas and the impact on employee benefits, company funding cost and (often the most relevant issue) company financial statement (pension liability and expense), then the consulting fees can be substantial - as are the fees to actually implement the conversion. If your actuary is unwilling or unable to have a no cost general pros and cons conversation with on this then maybe it's time to find a new one. If you are a public company and/or in the finance/banking industry, then I'm somewhat surprised you haven't already converted to cash balance or at least had specific material conversations about it. For a company/plan your size, the design discussion should be within the scope of your overall compensation and retirement benefits/total rewards objectives and include a comparative market survey, which kind of looks like what you're asking of this forum. Personally, I say consult with your actuary and possibly engage a total rewards consultant to determine what your company wants to provide, then drill down to your potential cash balance design on a top down approach rather than trying to go bottom up. We've worked on many conversions over the years, large and small, various industries (banks, hospitals, retail, etc.) and public and private companies. The primary objectives vary, including simplify plan, lower employer cost, lower employer F/S expense, keep employees whole. If your actuary won't engage in a complimentary discussion with you, I have no doubt that one of the actuaries of our company would love to have a conversation with you (as probably others in this forum would as well). Maybe I've dug way too deep and you only want some basic cash balance plan design education and thought it's be easier to ask here rather than sift through volumes of Google search articles, but you will need a deeper dive at some point to determine feasibility for your company.

Your surmise is sensible. In the mid-1990s, many investment and service providers for governmental 457(b) plans were based in life insurance companies. (Most of the biggest players still are.) That’s why lobbying on what became § 457(g) sought to allow trust substitutes, do so with recognized forms, and include annuity contracts as trust substitutes. When providers in 1996-1999 implemented the § 457(g) condition, many were done by adding one or two sentences of exclusive-benefit lingo to an annuity contract. When a governmental plan’s investments did not include collective trust units, some put non-annuity mutual fund shares under a custodial account. A large governmental § 457(b) plan often negotiates for the recordkeeper to provide a trust company, which might be a subsidiary or affiliate, to serve as the plan’s directed trustee.

It has been done, yes. In the late 90s early 2000, I assisted with a plan with about 9000 active employees and 8000 deferred vested and a few thousand retirees. Only the active employees were converted to cash balance and the plan sponsor used a very very long transition and provided several overlapping years of both cash balance accruals and traditional formula accruals. In 2006, the Pension Protection Act came along and cleared up a lot of issues for such conversions, as the “wear-away” method was one of the glaring issues that needed to be resolved. An ERISA counsel and an experienced large plan actuary should have no problem guiding you.

You are probably in the right spot. If you have questions, fire away. That said, IRS 5500 filings are in the public domain. https://www.efast.dol.gov/5500Search/ One of the attachments to the Schedule SB is a summary of plan provisions. That won't give you the language from the plan document, but it will let you see how a plan is designed. That said, your question is like walking out on a fishing pier and asking - is there any where I can see what kind of fish are out there?