david rigby

Follow the plan document. BTW, the plan sponsor (or whoever has the appropriate authority) can amend the plan to add this provision.

Have not checked the statute, but I read a summary that indicated it is effective for "plan years beginning on or after 09/23/2010".

Indeed. Consider also that you may eventually follow instructions of both. If B controls the existing plan, then A (probably) has no authority. In fact, A might not be the trustee any longer. But A may wish to create a new plan for the new company. Very often, there are more facts than first presented.

Possibly deceased? http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/

This question can be best answered by the plan's actuary. Or you can hire another actuary for this analysis.

IMHO, this is a good example of a need to change an assumption, no longer assuming that an HCE will get a lump sum.

See IRS Reg. 1.436-1(h)(4)(B).

Not the same as an IRS admission that they were wrong.

You're correct. Thanks.

Basic principles: - Create a 100% J&S at (current ages + 10). - Discount this by 10 years interest, and 10 years of survivorship for both. - Add a 10-year certain. If you have varying interest rates, the algebra is more complex, but same structure. Something like: a(angle 10) + v^10 * 10px * 10py [N(x+10)/D(x+10) + N(y+10)/D(y+10) - N(x+10:y+10)/D(x+10:y+10)] Please check. I'm rusty w/r/t commutation functions.

Call or e-mail me, please.

Sound like a good reason to require a plan document to be in writing.

Whether or not you are successful convincing the sponsor that some action is needed, the previous advice to resign as EA is the best approach. As SoCal correctly points out, this sponsor will probably object to any of your services that cost him/her money, anytime in the future, no matter how competitive your pricing may be. Alternatively, get paid first.

Are you sure? Catch-up contributions don't exist until elective deferrals have reached one of the limits: a plan-imposed limit, the 402g limit, or the ADP limit.

When you went to dinner, did you cut your pizza into 6, 4, or 3 slices?

Way too much time on your hands.

This caveat cannot be emphasized too much.

The only thing to add to Mike's comment is to make sure you are really in compliance with the funding standards. That is, if quarterlies were due in the past, but ignored, there is an interest penalty added to the required contribution. If the actual contribution was insufficient to cover that interest penalty, then the plan may have a funding deficiency, possibly over multiple years. Although the dollar amount of an interest penalty is usually small, the consequence of an ignored funding deficiency are not pleasant. The plan's Enrolled Actuary will know how to check this.

Perhaps a football coach?

By reference, certain sections of 401(a) are not relevant to governmental plans, unless required by state law. For example, 401(a)(3) references compliance with 410, but 410© exempts governmental plans. Another example, 401(a)(29) references compliance with 412 / 436, but 412(e) exempts governmental plans. Note that the ERISA exemption for governmental plans generally requires compliance with the IRC as it existed the day before ERISA was enacted. IMHO, the IRS wants nothing to do with policing plans of state and local governments.

BenefitsLink is supported by advertising; primarily job listings. http://employeebenefitsjobs.com/jobs/post_help_wanted.html

Isn't 410 a qualification requirement? This "opportunity" might smell.

Please post your inquiry here: http://employeebenefitsjobs.com/jobs/post_help_wanted.html

Not unlike certain government agencies that employ "actuaries" with no such professional designation?