david rigby

The original post implied, but did not state, that the participant is a VT. However, if the participant is actively employed, then the confusion over address may not be the fault of the participant.

The participant had to elect the form of distribution. Might the election form already serve this purpose? (OK, it may be wishful thinking, but it's worth a look.)

I agree with Andy. Both times.

See IRS Reg. 1.430(f)-1(d)(3)(ii). Read carefully.

http://benefitslink.com/modperl/qa.cgi?db=qa_who_is_employer

Data as of 31-AUG-10 (Tuesday) Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 4.26 4.26 Aa 4.53 4.48 4.51 A 4.78 4.78 4.78 Baa 5.36 5.60 5.48 Avg 4.89 4.78 4.84 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 0.28 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 1.23 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.83

Agree. Treat this as a data correction.

See IRC 411(a)(13) for the PPA-added vesting requirement for "hypothetical account balance plans".

Almost always this question is answered by the plan's definition of compensation.

Except for cash balance/hybrid plans.

Don't know if your inquiry is addressed, but Carol Calhoun includes a variety of information on her website: http://benefitsattorney.com/index.php

Normally, the plan document should identify who has the power to amend, and the trust document would not have power to override the plan document.

Per IRC sec. 71(b), alimony is taxable to the recipient (and hence deductible by the payor), if Since your payments to your ex are clearly not part of the QDRO, check with your attorney to see if those payments can be considered alimony under your divorce/separation agreement. You know what happens when we assume.

Prior discussions might help you: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=34236 http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=32892

... exception when the "customer" is the taxpayer.

He doesn't have to request a distribution. The plan is terminating, so the plan provisions will dictate what to pay, and when.

Good advice. To expand on this inquiry, if the plan is paying your ex before the QDRO is approved, that is probably not permitted by the plan. If you are paying it directly to ex, pending approval of QDRO, that is not a QDRO payment and you are responsible for the taxes on those amounts.

Is there a reason to terminate?

The original post may have an unspecified focus: Is that your question?

Incorrect spelling. It's Go Braves!

Probably advisable for the plan to engage its ERISA attorney on this question (or anything similar).

First concern is whether the plan still passes 410b and/or 410a26.

I never cite the Gray Book as gospel. No one is required to use it as guidance. However, often it provides value to actuaries, plan sponsors, attorneys, primarily to understand the reasoning behind some of the IRS positions. Sometimes it provides answers to a particular set of circumstances overlooked in prior regulatory guidance; even then it does not carry the force of law, but might be considered significant. The introduction to the 2008 Gray Book lists the IRS/Treasury representatives as:

There are 10 kinds of people in this world: those who understand binary, and those who don't.

I don't think the identity is relevant, but this provides an opportunity for clarification. Please read again the paragraph above that begins, "The above Response..." The language of the Gray Book is NOT authored by the IRS, but is a paraphrase of opinions expressed by IRS and Treasury representatives. The Gray Book carries NO legal weight, but is intended to reflect IRS/Treasury opinions, especially on interpretations that may not have been anticipated or included in formal regulatory guidance. Sometimes, as the law changes, opinions in the Gray Book will change.