david rigby

Why have a cash balance plan without a lump sum option? (It's just rhetorical; no reply expected.)

Sentence too long.

Happy 18th birthday to BenefitsLink. Attaboy, Dave!

It may help to read the actual DOL regulation. 2520.104b-1, section ©. That section was originally effective in 1997, but this link takes you to the 2002 revision. (As usual, DOL regs are not "reader-friendly"; look for "(c) Disclosure through electronic media".) http://webapps.dol.gov/FederalRegister/HtmlDisplay.aspx?DocId=19158&AgencyId=8&DocumentType=2

I saw that also. However, it appears the OP is requesting a copy of the plan document. IRA: please clarify what informaiton you are requesting.

Several prior discussion threads. See IRC 414(l). (That's a lower case L.)

"Social Security" is really multiple programs. OASI (old age security insurance) has morphed into OASDHI (now including Disability and Health).

Consider also that use of an intranet may require only one copy, that can be read (and perhaps printed) by any user on the intranet. For those without access to the intranet, a paper copy might be required.

Discrimination testing is about comparing HCEs to NHCEs, not about comparing within either of those classes. (Possible exception: Key employees)

Nothing is certain in bankruptcy. In any Distress Termination, the PBGC will go after any (and all) assets it can. Before, during and after the termination. No doubt about it: the plan sponsor needs legal counsel familiar with PBGC procedures.

Please re-phrase. What "money"? Collected by whom? etc.

TEFRA was passed in 1982, adding IRC 416 top-heavy rules, but they were first effective for PY beginning after 12/31/1983.

Who is "they" and what does "gave" mean? For example, if there is written Board action, then you may already have the proper authorization (although may not yet have completed the formal plan amendment).

Does IRS say anything about partial termination in such situation?

Cannot benefit by the murder (ie, cannot get a benefit from deceased spouse's plan). If it's his plan, he probably meets the requirements for a distribution (severed employment, etc). The plan probably has to treat him like any other former employee, including providing tax notice, rollover opportunity, etc.

Nope. I'll take mine, any day.

DownTown for a Pint?

You want one class of participants to subsidize other classes?

IMHO, the second response above from QDROphile is spot-on. You do have something to disqualify the DRO: the reference to 2003. It's not the Plan's job to find a way to make the DRO fit the plan; rather, the DRO parties must find a way to make the DRO fit the plan

Data as of 28-MAR-13 (Thursday) Market closed on Friday March 29. Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 3.90 3.90 Aa 3.93 3.96 3.95 A 4.17 4.23 4.20 Baa 4.68 4.98 4.83 Avg 4.26 4.27 4.27 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 0.48 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 1.23 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.63

Usually it has something to do with the employer's convenience. With a previous employer, we got a company-provided lunch. It was tax-free from IRS perspective but was taxed at $1 per day for FICA purposes.

It's also possible your employer never gave this provision much thought. You might ask them to consider amending the plan to permit such distributions on or after normal retirment age. It can't hurt to ask.

... assuming the letter will answer the question, "why is it incorrect?"

For additional discussion, search the entire forum: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?/forum/89-qualified-domestic-relations-orders-qdros/ using a search word such as "expense".