david rigby

QDROphile is correct. If the NQ plan does not have any existing language, it may be prudent to consider if there is any precedent. At any rate, perhaps the plan sponsor should take this opportunity to amend the plan to incorporate some provisions for beneficiary identification. This might emulate the qualified plan, but is not required to do so.

Assuming I've read my own chart correctly, an EE with 2008 comp > 105K will be an HCE in 2009.

The rules for any plan are (one hopes) contained in the plan itself.

Thou shalt not violate 415.

Another opportunity for an acronym? HQIA?

Less dollars going into the retirement program (one or more plans), then less dollars coming out in the form of benefits. Period.

Does it matter that this is a defined benefit plan?

Brings new meaning to the chicken-or-egg debate.

Maybe he did mean that.

415 401(a)(4) 416 etc.

Also, consider some type of unit accrual formula, prospectively.

... appropriate solution? Defined Benefit plans offer annuities more efficiently than insurance companies!

I'm not sure if that is what the questioner asked. Does "funding deficiency" refer to the use of that term in the IRC 412 sense? something else?

Recordkeeper? Isn't the trustee responsible for providing a trust statement?

Taking legal advice from an insurance agent?

Does this conform to the plan document?

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rp-08-50.pdf

Your facts imply a mistake by the trustee. Is that correct? Is the bank the plan sponsor or the trustee? If the bank is the trustee (and not also the sponsor), does it have the same rights as the the plan or the plan administrator? Perhaps the PA has standing to adjust/recoup future payments to correct its mistake, but does the trustee have the same standing? (I don't know, just asking.)

Was the participant a VT before you took over as TPA? - If no, then you would have found (or not found) a distribution in the assets, thus confirming the current status. - If yes, then this sounds like a data question for the plan sponsor to answer. Just a guess.

Really, you! The comments by AtA and SoCal are exactly on point. Averaging removes some volatility but adds some complexity. You decide which is best for you (which is characteristic of more than one design decision). In my experience, using a one-year stability period is very common. A one-month lookback is probably not enough, but the sponsor has reasonable flexibility in choosing that definition.

True, but that's not the only way to become an HCE.

Duplicate post, with a response. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=39718

Sounds like the right answer, but another possibility is that your account simply lost money in the general market decline.

Yep.

Yep, and it happens even without controlled group issues: perhaps identical plans for location A and location B.