david rigby

Ha ha ha.

Does this mean the benefit could be increased to use up the surplus?

What does this question mean? More generically, what is the point of this discussion thread?

Fire payroll company? Hey, just kidding. The "fault" probably lies with whoever gave (or should have given) instructions to payroll vendor.

Data as of 31-JAN-12 (Tuesday) Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 3.72 3.72 Aa 3.91 3.88 3.90 A 4.22 4.31 4.27 Baa 4.91 5.23 5.07 Avg 4.35 4.29 4.32 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 0.43 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 1.25 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.49

There's an unmarried community?

Very difficult to provide a good answer to your question: - The plan itself might outline what can or cannot be amended. - Church rules are probably not specific but might outline a general principal about permissible changes.

What am I missing? Is this a rollable distribution, subject to mandatory 20% withholding if paid in cash?

I agree with AtA, SoCal, AndyH, and Effen. Just my opinion: 1. Confirm that the plan did permit a J&S with a non-spouse (I'm skeptical; in 30+ years, I've never seen this, and I've seen a lot of plans). Your 2:48pm post indicates you have confirmed this. 2. If the plan is silent on permitted changes, then the answer is "no changes are permitted". That would preclude amending the plan to add the ability to change, since such amendment could not reduce any rights already in existence. 3. If the plan already permits a change (again, very doubtful), does the first contingent annuitant get nothing? I doubt that also.

It's been there since 1974. Original ERISA language.

Similar discussion http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=50202

1. See (1) above from QDROphile. 2. Read it again.

Keep your documentation of the trustee(s) accurate.

http://www.irs.gov/irb/2009-31_IRB/ar07.html

Depend on your relationship to the plan.Didn't the plan (or the plan's trustee, not the company) make the distribution? Seems like the 1099R should show the ID number(s) of the plan, and the SSN of the recipient.

Does this plan have a similar prior event? If not, perhaps it's an opportunity to create, document, and maintain a new administrative interpretation.

State restrictions? who cares? It's simply irresponsible to put at risk the SSN of someone else. In addition to being stupid, it might be an opportunity to get sued, even if your action is not the utlimate cause of identity theft. (BTW, do states have any authority over e-mail?)

Not sure if this is definitive, but look at Q&A15 from 2005 BlueBook: http://www.pbgc.gov/Documents/2005bluebook.pdf "Similarly, an individual with respect to whom the plan has benefit liabilities and any alternate payees with respect to that individual would be counted as one participant."

Any purchase of a commercial annuity by a DB plan must include all relevant provisions in the plan, including (for example) early retirement, J&S conversion factors, etc. Since the annuity must "mimic" the plan, that includes the RMD requirements. BTW, see Reg. 1.401(a)(9)-6, Q&A4.

Link?

Are you interested in adopting me?

But it's still late! - See Line 20b on Sch SB - interest penalty

duplicate post: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?s...c=50485&hl=

No. That table is the IRS summary, which they update simultaneously when they release the Notice each month.

4. Public relations debacle.