david rigby

Sieve, any comments on J Simmons' suggestion?

Perhaps. The alternative, doing nothing, seems counter to the goal of covering the compensation. Although I haven't reviewed the preamble, it seems likely that this situation is a perfect example of what the IRS was trying to accomplish with the "end of plan year" provision.

No disagreement with conclusions, but there may be more to it. I think the 415 reg requires the plan to state what is included in compensation. Is the payment of these $ amounts as W-2 sufficient for that purpose? This is my brief overview of relevant points from 1.415 reg. Valid? • In general, “severance from employment” is considered a single event or date, and is not gradual or phased in. • Certain types of compensation paid after an employee’s severance date can be included in a qualified plan’s definition of compensation, if paid within a specific limited time period. • Certain other types of compensation paid after an employee’s severance date cannot be included in a qualified plan’s definition of compensation, even if paid during the limited time period applicable above. • In order to include available amounts under the plan’s definition of compensation, the plan provision must state such inclusion, and the application of this definition must be non-discriminatory. If the plan provision is silent, then all compensation paid after a severance date is excluded.

It's pretty common. The plan can no longer pay monthly benefits, so it has to either pay lump sums or but an annuity.

The plan's termination provisions may have an alternative payment form (lump sum) that applies. If not, then the plan has to find some other way of completing the termination. What does the plan say in that case?

Is this a QJSA?

Some collective bargaining agreements state that the union "will be provided" with a copy upon completion of the filing.

New or old, having govt. tell you how to invest is a bad idea.

I think SoCal is correct about reference to Jordan, beginning on page 191 of the Second Edition (1975). Certainly one of the greatest books ever published. Andy is correct that the "pop-up option" is not discussed in Jordan, but it was discussed in my class, led by one of the greatest actuarial educators ever.

In 30+ years, I've never seen that benefit in a qualified plan. It may be more common in govt. plans. Other than that, my suggestion is that the participant may wish to spend an hour with an experienced ERISA attorney.

Maybe not. For EE over NRA, perhaps the plan's termination automatically defines the BCD. Read carefully.

Yes, the benefits s/b calculated at the BCD; the plan termination date is relevant because that is the absolute last date of any benefit accrual, unless the plan was amended to freeze accruals earlier. And, Effen is correct in his comment about actuarial increase. The exception might be if the EE had actually commenced payment at NRD (or some later date).

There are some prior discussion threads on this topic, such as: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=38044 http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=34709 http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=33878

Good find Blinky! Also, this: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=20619

I'm surprised that the plan document does not already spell out a procedure. If not, the document should be amended first. IMHO, you probably have some flexibility: - proportional to PVAB; - use the PBGC procedure (but don't change it one iota); - all NCHE's first, then PVAB ratio for HCEs; - other?? Just an opinion.

Most likely, the due date (if any) is governed by state law (or possibly local law).

Is this really a rollover? Does the plan permit the participant to "return" the funds? Just asking.

Probably not. What does the plan say? Perhaps I misread the question. If you are asking if the NRA can be used to determine the benefit and/or lump sum, then "probably not". If you are asking if the plan termination date should be used as a retirement date for the determination of the benefit and/or lump sum, that is probably what the plan will direct you to do.

Difficult to read the table in Tom's post. However, I agree with Austin's value: at age 65, IA83 table, 8.0%, female, the APR is 119.7554

Not the first person who can't understand the difference between effective date and adoption date.

Nice that you are so direct, Sieve.

Well ... the APR is a constant after you have chosen the interest rate and mortality table.

... or the ER could ask him how he is harmed by receiving something free. ... or the ER could ask itself/himself/herself about whether such employee...

Good advice from GMK. The norm is that the J&S goes to the person who was the spouse at the benefit commencement date; see IRS Reg. 1.401(a)-20, Q&A25.

Belgarath points are very good, especially Let's also take the high road, not just the convenient road. You will never regret a high level of personal integrity.