david rigby

There's a lawyer's union? AAIIEEE !!

Why is there a restriction?

If they are cut back to the administrative limit, will the ADP test pass? If not, you are going to do refunds anyway (probably).

Contact the company(s) that sponsored the plan(s). Probably ask for the Human Resources dept. If you need a start on address or other information, try http://www.freeerisa.com/. You will need to establish a (free) userID before accessing the data. Then click on "ERISA Form 5500 filings", and choose your search criteria. When you get a hit, look at the address and phone number on page 1 of the form.

Can a plan sponsor issue a 1099R? If the EE wants the ability to rollover the amount and/or not be subject to a 10% excise tax, then the payment should come from a plan/trust, not the ER. It appears the ER "messed up"; if not fixed, the EE bears the burden. Although it's a small amount, it would be prudent, as well as a learning experience, to make sure the audit trail of payments is correct. BTW, this is not a deductible expense for the ER's financial statements. But, of course, I'm not giving legal and/or accounting advice. The ER should consult the proper advisors.

I think this is the applicable reference. IRC 430(g)(3), last sentence, is amended to include reference to expected earnings: Old: ‘‘Any such averaging shall be adjusted for contributions and distributions (as provided by the Secretary).” New: ‘‘Any such averaging shall be adjusted for contributions, distributions, and expected earnings (as determined by the plan’s actuary on the basis of an assumed earnings rate specified by the actuary but not in excess of the third segment rate applicable under subsection (h)(2)©(iii)), as specified by the Secretary of the Treasury.’’

IMHO, since the changes in WRERA are retroactive, since should (must) recalculate the AFTAP at your valuation date. That replaces any prior AFTAP calculation.

I'll bite. Does it point west instead of south?

So far, that appears to be correct. The IRS could issue additional guidance that would permit the scenario you suggest.

I think that is not addressed by prop. regs. However, it may be reasonble to look at Rev. Proc. 2000-40; section 3.13 permits a change to BOY anytime, subject to the restrictions in Section 6.

Have I misread something? What about a PS plan for a pre-ret contribution/deduction? Sure it's not close to $1MM+, but it's more than zero.

Is this W-2 pay?

Would the addition of a PS plan help any?

You can find the IRS list of "standard mortality tables" in Regulation 1.401(a)(4)-12. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-...26/26tab_02.tpl The IRS has updated it from time to time; perhaps someone else can find a link to updates.

Would a DL have any bearing on this issue? At any rate, getting a DL is (almost always) a good idea.

From what I recall, a due date for any IRS filing that falls on a weekend or holiday is automatically extended, but any other due dates are not.

Yes. I read it as revising the definition of minimum. Which section is your focus?

I doubt the size of the excess is relevant. In the cases I've seen, the (relatively) small excess is what made it easy for the sponsor to decide to amend the plan. For a one-participant plan (assuming the participant is also the owner), what reason would there be (other than 415) to give the excess to the participant, rather than the sponsor? Participant gets it eligible for rollover, but sponsor pays (at least) excise tax on it. For the year of termination, if the sponsor has cash available for a contribution, then careful management of the freeze date and termination date should make it a simple contribution.

I see terminations of employment, but not termination of the plan. Which is it?

I doubt there is any prohibition, although there are some i's to dot and t's to cross. I've seen several plan terminations where the sponsor wanted to allocate excess to participants, primarily because the excess was not large. In this case, the plan was amended, after the freeze date but before actual distributions, to change the default from "sponsor" to "participants".

Interesting overview on NPR/All Things Considered from 12/31/08 (recording about 5 minutes). http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaP...&m=98913251 No doubt, you can find some more recent items.

Ditto. BTW, a generic page for contact information: http://www.pbgc.gov/about/contact.html

Well, you are consistent Ned.

Is this a different question?

Reasonable questions. Why not ask the vendor? Better yet, ask multiple vendors.