david rigby

Well, you are consistent Ned.

Is this a different question?

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

Is the participant looking for a waiver. It might be available. See page 24 of IRS Publication 590

It could be defined in the plan document, but probably not, in which case the PA should look to employment definitions in personnel policies. If a collective bargaining agreement is relevant, look there first.

On Jan. 2, I called Moody's and asked these questions. The response was "there will not be a 12/31 posting". As for "why", the response provided no detail; my own opinion is that Moody's decided to ignore 12/31 because the trading volume was low, or the trading day was short, or both.

Well, sometimes, they are the cause of the illogic. (Of course, in this regard, no one measures up to Congress.)

It's possible (maybe likely) that I misunderstand your question. 1. Note the phrase "without regard to subclause (II)". Is this part of your original question? 2. I think the proper reference for the mortality table is IRS Notice 2008-85, issued 9/30/08, published in Federal Register 10/20/08. But check for yourself to make sure this applies to your question.

See section 122 of the Worker, Retiree, and Employer Recovery Act of 2008: BTW, the reference to IRC 408 does not apply to all plans:

Data as of 30-DEC-08 Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 4.64 4.64 Aa 5.54 5.32 5.43 A 6.13 6.32 6.23 Baa 7.66 8.28 7.97 Avg 6.44 6.14 6.29 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 0.72 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 1.85 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.78 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Moody's has not posted any data for 12/31/08. (Perhaps because the trading day was short?) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just in case, here are the rates for December 29, 2008: Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 4.74 4.74 Aa 5.59 5.37 5.48 A 6.19 6.44 6.32 Baa 7.74 8.36 8.05 Avg 6.51 6.23 6.37 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 0.75 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 1.84 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.81

Shouldn't the 12/31/08 AVA (for IRC 430 purposes) = actual assets minus contributions already made for the PY = 0?

Not surprising. There is an increasing tendency for Congress to punt the details to the bureaucracy.

If you know which Federal Register you want, this link will get you there fast. http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/t...er/indexes.html Sometimes the best way to find original source is by searching BenefitsLink.

Hmmm. Perhaps I'm just an idiot. How can the employee have a deferral if there is no compensation? Was there an actual deduction from a paycheck? Did the plan accept a contribution that was not deducted from a paycheck? Is it possible that the plan did everything correct, but the 2006 payroll may have been "jimmyed"? (In case you were wondering, "jimmyed" is the technical term.)

Yes, I've found the reg. Perhaps my phrasing is flawed. What I meant is that the asset adjustment developed in the reg does not have a corresponding Code reference. Or does it?

Generally, the two most recent 5500's will be available free. You can get more, for a fee.

Nothing in Gray Book. IMHO, not sure the cited code section will be a problem. I can't find a cite in IRC 404 that corresponds to the 404 reg you cited; have I missed it? If no such cross reference, the adjustment to assets appears to be a regulatory creation. Is it reasonable to assume the IRS will make similar adjustment under the new 430/404 structure? But I'm willing to be educated about other perspectives.

Yep. Page 17 of the 08/31/07 Proposed Reg. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/07-4262.pdf 1.430(f)-1(f).

No lawyer I, but it seems this is, at least for now, a plan issue, not an estate issue. Please make sure your attorney is intimately familiar (not casually familiar) with QDRO's. JSimmons and mjb have provided good advice. The DOL has some "reading material" here: http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/Publications/qdros.html

To elaborate on Effen's answer, the "collective bargaining" exclusion applies to where pension benefits are the subject of good-faith bargaining. Not exactly the same as "union". See IRC 410(b) and regs.

Good advice. But beware, some (large) companies may outsource this function to an outside vendor.

Probably not reasonable to expect a waiver of excise taxes.

IRS guidance is likely, and needed. IMHO, it would be reasonable, at least in the meantime, to look to Rev.Proc. 2000-40 for expected smoothing structure; just can't go to five years anymore.

...also as permitted by the document (as mentioned by BG).

Net effect, a built-in experience loss? But wouldn't the 404 maximum (usually) permit the ER to make sufficient contribution to keep him 100% funded?