david rigby

If the plan provision(s) define the default beneficiary as "estate", the plan cannot pay to someone else. "Thou shalt follow the terms of thy plan." (That's why the plan is in writing.) First, the cost of creating/re-opening the estate is not the concern of the plan and/or plan sponsor. Get the proper documentation, because that's what the plan requires. Second, re-read the plan to confirm thay you have the correct interpretation of "beneficiary". Third, if desired, the plan, including the definition of beneficiary, can be amended (assuming it's done on a non-discriminatory basis.)

There might be some kumquats in there also.

No. You cannot roll over anything unless you get a distribution. In general, no one gets a distribution until some type of severance of employment. Very likely, your plan also states that no distribution is permitted after severance IF the participant (you) has been rehired before the actual distribution is made.

416?

Original post is not clear. - Did you get a distribution? If so, has it already been rolled over? anywhere? - Alternatively, are you saying that your May 2011 termination of employment will trigger a distribution (not yet made)? If so, the comment from QDROphile is correct: most plans will not permit you to recieve such a distribution due to rehire. (Admittedly, some employers fail to understand this provision.)

Well... that might also leave out any child born or adopted after the designation.

Relationship of the questioner to the plan is important. No plan sponsor and/or trustee should take advice about a PT from anyone other than his/her legal counsel.

The UP84 table is unisex. The base table is defined as "appropriate" for a population of 10% - 30% female. Use the midpoint of 20%. Then, the table was defined so that each one-year setback(setforward) is equivalent to a 20% increase(decrease) in the female portion of the population. Conclusion: a one-year setforward is 100% male, and a four-year setback is 100% female. Note that this table is significantly out-of-date. Be sure it is appropriate for your use.

Instructions for W-4P: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw4p.pdf

Recent disscussion: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=52397

Announcement 2012-44 http://benefitslink.com/src/irs/a-12-44.pdf

You can be nice and respond, but take note that this is an ex-participant.

Safe Harbor plan?

It could also be an attempt to avoid an audit, if the split takes the two separate plans below the 100 participant level.

In a plan termination, the participant is in control of where the distribution goes. No, you cannot force a participant to make a direct rollover to another ER plan.

At the risk of the obvious, what does the plan say?

In addition to the cautions stated above, is there an insurable interest here?

Sorry, not direct answer to your question. Are you a TPA? The nature of your "takeover" is not clear from your question. Just my opinion: I think the determination of ASG is a job for the plan sponsor's attorney, and the response should be in writing. If you think the sponsor is trying to avoid the legal opinion, it might be best to keep moving.

You can find the instructions for 5500-SF here: http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/5500main.html#2011 Open the instructions, and search for the word "amend".

See http://www.irs.gov/ for the IRS relief.

There have been a few prior discussion threads on the question of "un-terminate". No definitive conclusion. Here's my thought process: the termination was accomplished via plan amendment. If there have been no other actions to accomplish the termination, then the plan can be amended again to reverse it. Caution: as stated above, you cannot reverse the 100% vesting. More important than my opinion: ask the advice of the ERISA attorney who drafted the original termination amendment. (You did use an ERISA attorney, didn't you?)

I think 1.402©-2 Q&A6(b) supports the position that such retroactive payment is not eligible for rollover. "...will be treated as a substantially equal payment in the series...". This leads back to Q&A3(b)(1) which states NO.

Find IRS Publication 590 here: http://apps.irs.gov/app/picklist/list/formsPublications.html Then start reading on page 23.

Hurricane Sandy caused havoc with regular reporting of rates around the end of October. The kind folks at Moody's have given me the following summary for several days. Note that the bond market was closed on 10/30, so there is no entry for that date. 11/2/2012 11/1/2012 10/31/2012 10/29/2012 10/26/2012 Avg. Corporate 3.94 3.92 3.87 3.90 3.95 Aaa 3.47 3.45 3.40 3.44 3.48 Aa 3.61 3.59 3.54 3.57 3.61 A 3.89 3.86 3.81 3.84 3.89 Baa 4.52 4.50 4.45 4.49 4.54 Avg. Industrial 3.87 3.85 3.80 3.83 3.88 Aaa 3.47 3.45 3.40 3.44 3.48 Aa 3.54 3.52 3.47 3.50 3.54 A 3.89 3.85 3.81 3.84 3.89 Baa 4.58 4.56 4.51 4.54 4.59 Avg. Public Utility 4.00 3.98 3.93 3.97 4.02 Aaa Aa 3.67 3.65 3.60 3.64 3.68 A 3.88 3.86 3.81 3.84 3.88 Baa 4.45 4.43 4.39 4.43 4.49

Required by whom? - IRS? No. - DOL? No. - Local or state government statute? For you to verify. - Local or state government policy? For you to verify.