WDIK

other postemployment benefits?

Since this was posted under the 401(k) Plans forum, I feel compelled to point out that individual account plans are not covered by the PBGC. I'm not sure if it will be relevant or not.

Even though the NCHE's have no benefit, I think that you are still stuck with the small plan audit/bonding requirements.

I don't know about other companies, but at least Colonial Surety has different premium rates for qualified versus non-qualified assets. The non-qualified asset rates are over four times the qualified asset rates. But still, for $2,500 you could purchase a $1.1 million bond for non-qualified assets.

For some reason, filing all of the necessary extensions by July 31st seems more stressful to me than meeting the October 15th deadline. I guess I'm paranoid that a new client or a takeover plan isn't in the system. Thank goodness for the new delinquent filers program and the reduced penalties!

Neither my brain nor my calculator has that kind of precision!

I think that the answer depends on whether or not the appropriate EGTRRA amendment was adopted for the defined benefit pension plan, so that no top-heavy benefits accrue under the frozen plan. If the amendment was adopted, I think that you can use the 3% top-heavy level in the defined contribution plan.

Try these threads: Due date for Final 5500 after Merger MPP PSP Merger / 5500

I would do the amended filing, as already suggested, by 7/31.

Is the due date past?

The plan document should indicate if distributions to an alternate payee under a QDRO can be paid earlier than the date the participant is entitled to his/her distribution. The document should also address the timing issue of your other question.

DH: Obviously, you have strong political opinions. I have been sitting here trying to determine how I could respond and keep with the topic of this thread. I have decided that I can't. I find this forum very useful as a means of interacting and getting input pertaining to employee benefit topics. I'm sure that there are other places where you can discuss political ideology.

I think that our system of government is quite remarkable. In my view, the problem is that not enough citizens will get involved, express their opinions, and hold our elected officials accountable for their actions. However, this seems to be getting off topic.

Question 175 of the "Who's the Employer?" column on BenefitsLink deals with staffing firms and comes to a different conculsion.

At least one reason to file the Schedule P is so that the statute of limitations will start to run. (I'm confused by the loan comment.)

Read my lips - "No new taxes!" (Sorry George, Sr.)

Kirk: I can understand the basis for your more recent argument against incorporating the SPD into the plan document. Here are some counter-arguments: 1) Is the Summary Plan Description a summary of the actual document, or a summary of the plan provisions? If the latter, the SPD would not be a summary of itself. 2) Many business reports have included in them an executive summary. Isn't the executive summary both a part of the report and a summary of the report? Would the same logic apply with respect to the SPD? 3) I have not done an exhaustive search, but the language that I found in the regulations did not define an SPD so much as it described what the SPD should contain and the need to use understandable language. Where do the regulations indicate that the SPD cannot be part of the plan? I'm not trying to be difficult, just thorough. (Remember I don't think it's a good idea.)

Kirk: I'm not sure I follow how the regulation you cite would preclude the plan document incorporating portions of the Summary Plan Description by reference. The situation described does not necessarily mean that the language in the SPD is complex or technical. Rather, the plan document could merely be referring to simple language in the SPD, such as name and address of sponsor or trustee, eligibility requirements, etc. Personally, I don't like the idea, but I am not convinced that your reference is on point.

Our tax dollars at work!

I remembered reading the following thread: The opinion of FrankPrager was that the numbers must be floored at zero. I don't know of any source for this, but it made sense to me. P.S. I am not an actuary, so don't place much confidence in my conculsions. (See, I can't even get the link to work right.) The title of the thread was EA Meeting - anything of importance so far?, started by mwyatt on 3/18/03.

I took Blinky's statement to apply to future years where the count had dropped below 100, not the year with 120+ participants at the beginning of the plan year.

I have had similar situations in the past and was not able to find any definitive timeframe that an employee must be terminated. I also would appreciate any comments. One thought has to do with the administrator making a determination on the claim. In general, the plan administrator has up to 90 days to reach a decision. Perhaps, this guidline could apply. Is the participant willing to be terminated for a 90 day period while the claim is reviewed?

The instructions for Line 9e of the Schedule B say that the applicable interest rate for this purpose is the greater of: 1. 175% of the Federal mid-term rate at the beginning of the plan year, or 2. The rate used to determine the 'RPA '94" current liability.

Page 9 of the Form 5500 instructions for 2002 describes a Master Trust Investment Account.

I agree that the instructions could be more clear and that it is a lot of extra work. Is this surprising considering the source? The phrase assets held for investment confused me for a long time, because it sounded like it meant monies waiting to be invested. It actually refers to assets invested (with a few exceptions enumerated on page 41 of the 2002 Form 5500 booklet). It is required for all large plans that have assets held for investment purposes. Your spreadsheet approach seems good. Follow the headings in the instructions. With regard to 5% of current value, the 5% figure is determined by comparing the current value of the transaction at the transaction date with the current value of the plan assets at the beginning of the plan year. (Use the end of year value for the initail plan year.) Hope this is helpful. Good luck.