Calavera

Check what your plan document says about a year of participation/accrual. You mentioned that the plan was frozen 1/1/2016 and not 12/31/2015. If your year of accrual is based on 1 hour of work, you may have 4 years and not 3 years of participation. Otherwise you should be good, and the benefit will stay at $5,250 level.

As part of his full distribution he would elect a full lump sum IRA rollover. A portion of his lump sum would not be eligible for rollover due to RMD and has to be taken as cash payment. This portion may be calculated using the account balance method. See 1.401(a)(9)-6 Q-1 (d)(1) for more details.

By taking the full lump sum in service distribution you may use the account balance method to determine the amount not eligible for rollover due to RMD. Therefore you will get the same result as if you would take it from the IRA.

Yes. However can wait until 70.5 and take full lump sum in service distribution as well.

Years of participation for 415 purposes are tied to years of benefit accrual service (see Years of Participation definition under 1.415(b)-1). So I am not sure that you can even recognize additional years of participation for 415 purposes when a plan is frozen. But what you can recognize is increase in the 415 $ limit. However this amendment will be discriminatory if you have any non-HCEs in your DB plan.

Those who eligible to retire should receive their immediate annuity benefit based on the early retirement provisions of the plan. The lump sum amount may exclude the early retirement subsidy and be only based on the present value of the deferred annuity. The amendment to offer the lump sum should properly reflect that. Alternatively, the early retirement subsidy could be included for everybody, using a plan's early retirement reduction from NRA to ERA and an actuarial equivalent thereafter. The amendment will need to reflect it as well.

Non-professional sole proprietor hiring his spouse will be filing 5500-EZ and will be covered by PBGC.

Yes. I assume person in question would be a top-25 paid participant. Therefore, be sure plan is at least 110% funded on a post-distribution basis if this participant takes a lump sum.

You will need to split his income into contribution and post-contribution net-earned income that has to support the contribution. Generally he may need to make only minimum required contribution during first 3 years to establish higher net-earned income. Very careful planning is required for the first 3 years where contributions should be made after the year end when the net income is known. This why in certain cases it is not beneficial to have a defined benefit plan for a new company for at least first 2 years, especially if income is not projected to be high enough.

I disagree with this statement. See https://www.pbgc.gov/docs/QDRO-model_separate.pdf, https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/about-ebsa/our-activities/resource-center/faqs/qdro-drafting. for more information. QDRO says: "ORDERED , that the Plan Administrator issue separate checks to the PARTICIPANT and the ALTERNATE PAYEE for their respective interests in the plan at the time its benefits become payable" You cannot take it away from AP in the separate interest QDRO. However this seems a shared interest QDRO and not a separate interest QDRO. It is not clear from the extract of the language provided. And in this case she can be really out of luck. The relevant sections in this case to review would be the timing of payments section and death of relevant parties section.

I feel that under the separate interest QDRO she cannot possibly be "out of luck" and she is still entitled to 50% of the portion of the pension earned during the marriage. Can you attach a QDRO so we can see actual language (just strip out all personal info).

If no survivor benefits were included, and QDRO was written properly, death of the participant should not have any effect on the award benefit. Ex-wife should still be entitled to 50% of the portion of the pension earned during their marriage. New wife should be entitled to survivor benefit of the remaining pre-divorce and all post-divorce benefits. See if QDRO has any sections describing "If participant dies before commencement then..."

The normal due date means the last day of the 7th month after the end of plan year whether it is short or not. So for the short plan year, the extended due date will be 9 1/2 months after the end of the short plan year.

Possible mismatches may come from accounting for payables/receivables benefit payments and/or expenses on 5500. Also some statements sometimes show the accrued income, and some do not.

1.411(a)-7: “For purposes of subdivision (ii)(B) of this subparagraph, participation commences on the first day of the first year in which the participant commenced his participation in the plan”

Not sure what is the correct way. It is definitely a safe way to count earned income as the net. However there is a view that negative income should be treated as zero. So could be subject to facts and circumstances. There are several paragraphs about it in ERISA outline book.

Indeed he was

Check the plan document. Generally a plan document specifically has it in to avoid the rollover. So you would pay it as cash with 20% withholding (no notice, no election, no rollover).

AdKu, Your understanding is correct. Only in your example the plan basis is 1, since early retirement benefits are unreduced.

Under the final regulations, spousal consent is required if the spousal portion of the optional form of benefit chosen at the RASD is less than the QJSA that is available currently (e.g., if the 50% survivor benefit would be $100 if the benefit were taken currently, but only $90 if the benefit were taken retroactively, the spouse must consent to the retroactive ASD). It implies you have to provide current calculation for a proper spousal waiver. I think when a participant retires you have to provide a current calculation (not some future ASD). The RASD calculation is optional if plan calls for it. Then a participant has a choice of retiring as of now, or retiring as of RASD.

Don't forget to send us post cards, something like: Wish you were here!

Just want to add more complexity to your way of thinking. What about mortality tables? Are you using the applicable mortality and therefore the table is different from year to year?

I would suggest sending an official letter to the company B requesting the determination of the present value of this benefits as if the lump sum option exists.

Don't know about ASG but not CG.

Participant who is 71 now may or may not miss his RMD yet. Be sure you are eligible for a self correction (i.e. failure is insignificant). You cannot roll over whole amount.