david rigby

Data as of 30-OCT-09 (Friday) Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 5.16 5.16 Aa 5.24 5.22 5.23 A 5.55 5.59 5.57 Baa 6.12 6.42 6.27 Avg 5.64 5.60 5.62 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 0.86 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 2.44 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 3.90

If you have some flexibility (and I'm not sure you do), perhaps consider prorating on the number of actual pay dates vs. hypothetical pay dates in 12 months.

Just for clarity: typo. The reg. cite should be 1.401(a)(9)-4

Is this legit in a qualified plan?

Follow the plan document. The "5-year rule" is not statutory; not even regulatory. It comes from a GCM (General Counsel Memorandum) that is specifically focused on DC plans. Likely, the plan will guide you to vest any participant who has not yet incurred a break-in-service. This will (oversimplified) mean anyone who is active or anyone who terminated employment in the current year. For example, if plan termination date is 12/31/09 (assuming CY plan year), then anyone who terminated during 2009 will get 100% vesting. But, if you have doubts, be sure to get advice from an experienced ERISA attorney.

Yes, and yes. I think your reference to "12/31/09" in (2) should be "12/31/2010"? Likely, the IRS will never object to a change to BOY, consistent with Rev. Proc 2000-40 (and its predecssor RP 95-51).

Please pardon the brain freeze. w/r/t a PPA amendment, are there "PFEA-related" items that should be included? thnx.

Would not that be @ 1/1/2008? PPA section 701(e)(3).

Groan! (You might have to explain this to all the readers who did not take physics or chemistry.)

Before searching for legal opinion, consider that it may just be sloppy. Someone may have set a "rounding parameter" somewhere, but did so incorrectly, and then proceeded without checking.

Calling Ned Ryerson.

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=42789

Try the Search feature for previous discussion threads on this topic. A good search term might be "missing participant" or "lost participant".

My interpretation is that the postmark should be by the 120th day.

While Gary's question may be a valid inquiry for someone desiring to provide service to his/her clients, it does seem to cross the line with respect to the purpose of these Message Boards. From the About BenefitsLink page: "Our purpose is to support the people who administer, give compliance advice about, design, make policy for, or otherwise are concerned with, employee benefit plans in the United States sponsored by either private or governmental employers. Information presented here is designed to help people working directly or as service-providers for employers of all sizes. " The Boards are a very valuable tool for sharing information, and we are very grateful to Dave Baker for BenefitsLink. Many users would be disappointed if the Boards were no longer available, or lost credibility, because of activities or postings that appear related only to "how much can I charge". Sometimes a reply appears to be irrelevant to the orginal topic. We all benefit by avoiding "clutter", but sometimes there is another purpose: - Just because a reply is "lighthearted" does not mean it is irrelevant; - You are not required to respond to every reply; - Some replies really are intended as jokes; although they may be distracting to the message, sometimes they can be useful to keep us from taking ourselves too seriously; - Some people reply with worthwhile comments, but their phrasing may be inadequate and distort the intended message (that's why we have the ability to edit our messages); we just have to accept their flaws, forgive them, and hope they forgive us as well; - Not everyone takes, or gives, criticism well; - None of us knows everything, so we do well when we are willing to listen to others.

I think Tom has it correct: if the increase is defined by the year-over-year increase in the CPI (or any other index), then 2011 will reflect a one-year increase. BTW, in separate correspondence, the SSA has confirmed my estimate: the wage base would have been $109,200.

In case you were following the Continental Airlines case, where several pilots allegedly (?) created sham divorces so that a QDRO could be used to get at qualified plan money, it appears the judge has said "none of your business" to the company. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6675081.html

I don't discuss fees here.

What kind of FAS report? 87? 106? Other?

I think there are several prior discussion threads that are pretty close to your scenario.

I estimate the 2010 SSWB would have been $109,200 if not constrained by the COLA. I looked for this on the SS website, but could not find an anwer: assuming next year's COLA is greater than zero, I wonder if that means the 2011 wage base will reflect two years of increase. Anyone have any insight?

How 'bout that old standby: "what does the plan say?"

Correct. I meant your unpaid bills, if any.

Unpaid invoices should be identified first (not necessarily paid first). Then discuss ongoing services. Sure, they might be combined in a more inclusive engagement, but at least you will have addressed them.

Your responsibility is to act professionally. Paid? Yes. Tell the PBGC what you think is reasonable, and be prepared to negotiate. If there are unpaid invoices, deal with those separately. Just an opinon.