Effen

My experience is the PBGC is pretty open to conversations. I suggest you give them a call and ask how they they want you to proceed.

in that case, there is no QDRO so the plan did nothing wrong. However assuming the divorce decree awarded you half of the participants account balance, you will need to contact your lawyer and sue the participant to get it back. Just like if the court awarded you the car, but your ex jumped in and drove away.

You have a legally protected right to a copy of the plan document. The Plan Administrator must provide it upon written request. Send the Plan Administrator a written (paper) request for a copy of your benefit calculation worksheet, the Summary Plan Description, and the Plan Document, including all amendments and attachments. They may charge you a reasonable copying fee. The only way to know if they did the calculation correctly is to see the plan document.

There are several alternative methods for handling rehired participant who previously received a distribution. As Hojo said, the actuary appears to be following one of those methods. In order to know if that method is appropriate, you should request a copy of the plan document. The plan is only permitted to offset for prior distributions if it is explicitly stated in the document. If the plan document does not explicitly state the benefit should be offset for prior distributions, then they should give you the additional accruals without the offset. Make sure to request a copy of the document that was in effect in 2016, and any subsequent plan amendments. Also as Hojo said, this will be a legal document, full of a legal phrases, but there is usually a section specifically related to Late Retirement or Postponed Retirement or Rehired Participants that will contain the language you will need to review. Also, request a copy of the Summary Plan Description. This will be written in plain English, but it might not be specific enough for what you are looking for.

One small tweak, I don't think you would prorate the normal cost for the short plan year. The normal cost should reflect the anticipated accrual. If you used an elapsed time method for accruals, then proration might be appropriate, but if you used 1000 hour rule, the normal cost might be either a full year's accrual, or no accrual.

I probably would not have classified that way. Plan is terminated, no harm, no foul.

Your questions are very confusing. 1) The QDRO should state what happens to the share of the participant's benefit that was assigned to the AP if the AP dies first. Again, the results may be different depending on if the AP dies pre/post commencement of benefits. 2) Is this intended to be a statement, or a question? What do you mean the "first spouse ... is the Second Spouse"? on the Note: This is very critical. If the participant was already receiving payments when the QDRO was executed, generally, the only option is a "shared interest" payable in the form previously elected by the participant. In other words, the participant elected a form of payment and a possibly a beneficiary at the time of retirement. Those provisions generally cannot be changed. Therefore, the QDRO could only assign a portion of the benefit the participant was receiving to the AP. In that situation, if the AP died first, the payments would generally revert to the participant. If the participant had elected a joint and survivor benefit with the 2nd spouse as beneficiary then the benefits would go to the 2nd spouse on the death of the participant. If the participant elected a life annuity, all payments would stop upon the death of the participant. This is just the way I think it should have been handled. Others have different opinions so you need to read the QDRO. It will contain the answer.

Echoing what Mike said. Lots of possibilities, the QDRO will contain the answers. The QDRO splits the participant's benefit into two pieces. One for the participant, one for the AP. "shared interest" vs. "separate interest" relate to how the benefits are treated upon the death of either beneficiary or spouse. You need to read the QDRO for details because there are too many options to try to explain in a short response. Also, California is a "community property" state, so that likely complicates things as well. Either way, regarding the piece that is assigned to the participant, if you were the spouse of the participant at the time they commenced payments, they either elected a Joint and Survivor benefit with you as beneficiary, or you waived your rights and they selected a different form of payment, or beneficiary. The piece that was payable to the AP either reverted to the participant or stopped at the time of the APs death depending on the language in the QDRO and the AP's election. If it reverted to the participant, and if you were receiving the participant's share, it is possible that it would go to you, but the QDRO language and participant's elections will control. It is also important to know if the AP and/or participant died before or after retirement benefits commenced. The QDRO likely treats these events differently.

I think it would definitely part of the accrued benefit. When you allocate excess assets, you are essentially increasing everyone's accrued benefit, that is why you need to test it for non-discrimination. Either way, better safe than sorry. Just amend the plan to state that the accrued benefit can exceed $3,500 if it is the result of the allocation of excess assets at the time of termination.

Thank you for the correction.

Don't over think it. Plan cannot exist without a sponsor (although sometimes they do). Part of winding down the business is terminating the plan. If a retiree remains, the plan will need to purchase an annuity before it can terminate. Yes, sometimes sponsors remain in existence with no employees simply to maintain the plan, but it generally isn't the best way to proceed. What happens if/when the sole owner of the sponsor dies? What if the plan requires a contribution at some point in the future - where does the money come from? If the plan is overfunded, the plan document will define what to do with the excess assets. They either revert to the company (big excise tax), or they will be reallocated to existing participants. If they are reallocated, that allocation must be non-discriminatory. They can also be transferred to a successor plan, but since the sponsor has no employees, that isn't a viable option.

Do male/male and female/female tables exist that we can use? Yes - the actuary should be able to produce those for you. Or is it okay to use the opposite-sex tables even for same-sex couples? Non-ERISA - you can do what you want. ERISA - Yes, as long as the table you use is not based on the gender of the participant. IOW, you can treat all participants as "male" and all beneficiaries as "female". Or you can treat them all as male, or all as female, or treat them all as 75% male and 25% female, but you can't specifically use male mortality for males and female mortality for females when determining the amount of their benefit. If we do the later, are there any special considerations (i.e. do we need to notify the parties or obtain consent)? I don't know of any special notices that are required, however an ERISA plan is required to provide the relative value of each of the optional forms of payment and disclose the assumptions used for that purpose.

Since the benefit was in pay status at the time the plan terminated and no changes can be made to the form of payment or the covered participants. However, the plan was apparently offering a lump sums to retirees, which creates a new Annuity Starting Date and a new opportunity to change to a different optional form. Since this participant had a QDRO in place, it sounds like the Plan Administrator (and hopefully the plan document) excluded those with QDROs from the lump sum offer. Nothing wrong with any of that in my opinion. Husband gets a new QDRO that changes things, PA rejects it because you cant change things once they are in payment status. Nothing wrong with that. In short, I have no issues with what the PA did. If you want to confirm, as to see a copy of the amendment terminating the plan and see if those with QDROs were excluded from the lump sum option. 1) The QDRO can require the Participant to select a specific option. 2) PA did nothing wrong based on what you described 3) Husband could try to argue with the insurance company (as Peter said), but I wouldn't expect them to change anything either.

Many retirement plans offer unreduced benefits upon disability - meaning no early retirement reduction. Sometimes they are even supplemented for a period. If the participant recovers, the disability payments stop (no one ever does). If the participant dies, the disability benefit stops and the normal death benefit is paid to the beneficiary. Once they participant hits NRA, the disability payments stop and the participant elects a retirement benefit. The disability benefit is completely separate from the retirement benefit and is therefore considered to be "ancillary". This benefit can be removed without violating 411(d)(6). Other plans may provide a similar unreduced benefit, but the participant chooses a form of lifetime payment at the time of disability. Not sure what happens if the participant recovers, but the participant in essence "retires" at their disability date. In my experience this type of provision is very rare. I believe this benefit would possibly be subject to 411(d)(6) since it is really a retirement benefit. The benefits aren't always unreduced, but they are usually heavily subsidized. These types of features are most common in hourly or bargained plans. Hope that helps.

Please DO NOT provide the exact name of your plan. However, as fsminc stated, it would be important to confirm if it is a qualified, or a non-qualified, plan. It would be helpful if you could provide the name, but leave out the sponsor's name.

Closing this due to double posting. Probably s/b kept in this board but someone already replied in Defined Benefit Board. See thread of same name in Defined Benefit Board integrated-pension-plan-and-divorce on the defined benefit board

You should consider asking the ABCD for guidance.

Couple things immediately jump to mind. 1) This is a cash balance plan, not a defined contribution plan. You can't just split the assets and pay the AP. I don't see many cash balance QDROa, but I don't think you can just pay the AP unless the participant is otherwise eligible for early retirement. You could establish an account for the AP inside the plan, but I don't think you can "pay" them until the participant is entitled to payment either by termination or becoming eligible for early retirement. I might be wrong about this, but I have never seen it in practice. 2) Your mixing up thoughts. The QDRO should have absolutely nothing to do with any benefits the AP earned in the plan. Any benefits earn by the AP are 100% hers, unless the participant has a QDRO attaching her benefits. 3) Your letter should be addressed to the PA, but if you copy one of the attorneys, you should copy both the participant's and the AP's attorney. 4) I guess this all is a long way of asking - does it matter what the QDRO says if the attorneys, participant, and AP all agree with the payments? A QDRO is really like a plan amendment. If you rephrased your question I think you have your answer. "Does it matter what the document says?"

Was the $ amount specified in the QDRO or just the % of the account balance? If the $ amount was specified, I say, everything is fine. However, if the % was specified in the QDRO, and you don't agree with the payment amount, then you should communicate your concerns to the Plan Administrator. If you are acting as the Plan Administrator, you should consider sending both attorneys a letter expressing your concerns. If neither responds, then you have done your duty. The attorney represents the individual and is trying to get the most of their client. You represent all plan participants, include the AP. Is it possible the valuation date used in the QDRO is not the same valuation date you used? If the plan is still accruing benefits, maybe additional benefits earned after a certain date were not allocated to the AP?

I have seen QDROs that allocate 100% of the marital portion to the AP. I don't believe there is any limit, assuming both sides agree and it doesn't result in any additional net benefits.

I am fine with whatever the group thinks is best. I haven't logged in or out of BenefitsLink in years so I actually have no idea what my password is or which of my email accounts this is associated with, but I am sure we can figure it out.

https://www.irs.gov/irb/2020-51_IRB#NOT-2020-85 2022 mortality table for 417(e) was released in 2020, so "no", it won't show any impact for COVID. Long term, that is still being studied. You might find this piece helpful. https://www.clubvita.us/assets/images/general/clubvita_US_scenariospaper_covid19_f2_01.pdf There are also pieces published by the CCA and the Academy. Should be able to find them with a Google search.

I found the Gray Book Question that triggered it for me. 2009 Q/A 39

I agree with CB that you should contact the ABCD. Unfortunately, it doesn't sound like he will be cooperative with them either. That said, the plan sponsor is the primary source of participant history. I recognize it is much easier to get this from the prior actuary, but the sponsor should have records of the information they provided. You can get the plan document from the attorney or the sponsor. There is really very little the actuary has that you can't obtain from other sources. Has the prior actuary provided the signed SB for the last valuation they prepared? That would be the one item I would either confirm they will provide, or you will need to inform the sponsor that you will need to redo the most recent valuation. With ARPA's passage - you might just want to do that anyway.