david rigby

Responses are correct. It may help the questioner to note, no matter who has "input" into determing the rates, if anything is challenged by the SEC, it must be the plan sponsor (ie, the owner of the financial statements) who answers those questions.

Don't forget that the test for exemption from shortfall amortization is based on AVA minus prefunding balance (not carryover balance).

Hey, how about our intrepid webmaster! (He's not near Milwaukee, but what the heck.)

Depends on who owns the contract. If the plan, then it is just a plan investment, and the plan still has liability to the participant. If this is an irrevocable commitment, such that the assets and liabilities are no longer in the plan, how could the plan have any responsibility?

I suggest your own research to confirm, but here is my best recollection: 1. No. The max is greater of amount under IRC 430 or greater of: (a) FT plus NC plus cushion amount, minus AVA, or (b) if not subject to at-risk, then FT plus NC (both determined using at-risk assumps) minus AVA. (For a non-frozen plan that is compensation-based, I'm not sure if (b) could be greater than (a), but I have not tested that.) 2. For cushion amount, assume both the comp and benefit limits apply, except that a PBGC covered plan may ignore the comp limit. 3. I don't see any interest adjustment in the contribution, for 430 or 404. It appears that all amounts (FT, NC, AVA, cushion, etc.) are calculated at the valuation date. But I could be missing something.

I've gone down this road before. Lori's answer is correct. IMHO, using rounded numbers on one schedule of the 5500 and unrounded on another schedule is undesirable.

The IRS-defined yield curve is here: http://www.irs.gov/retirement/article/0,,id=177408,00.html BTW, although we have asked, the IRS has declined to provide this in a format for easy downloading.

I thought this happened in the past (that is, the IRS treated a 5500 filing as "making an election"), but that position changed upon a formal challenge.

Q. How do you define diversification? A. Putting your money under several different mattresses.

I agree w Andy. His suggestion is pretty common, and (actuarially) simple.

Not sure what this means. I thought IRS Reg. 1.411(d)-4 provides that a disability benefit is not protected, and can be eliminated via plan amendment. See part (d) of Q&A1.

If covered by the PBGC, some guidnace on events and timing can be found here: http://www.pbgc.gov/docs/500_instructions.pdf

Any possibililty that the new group is just part of the controlled group, but not an adopting employer under the Plan?

Here is rant: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?s...st&p=104851

A QDRO is the specific legal exception to the anti-alienation provision, and the exercise of having a DRO reviewed by the plan administrator, to determine if it should be accepted as a QDRO, is an important part of the process. Excellent comments above from JSimmons and QDROphile.

Duplicate post. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?s...c=40019&hl=

If you mean non-vested terminated participants, then see page 14 of the instructions for when to exclude them. If you mean non-vested active participants, then they must be counted for the flat rate.

I'm confused (OK, perhaps that is common). Are you saying a benefit that is triggered by a disability is not an ancillary?

Of course it was borrowed. Every (!) SS surplus has been borrowed by Congress, with no real plan to repay it. BTW, when the 42nd president said "the budget deficit is zero", he was ignoring the borrowed SS surplus that was used to "balance" the budget. If "pro" is the opposite of "con", then what is the opposite of Progress?

Sounds like he is a resident alien. BTW, would it be different if he were "working here on a" Mastercard?

Because that's the way politics works.

FYI, it is Q&A 30 from 2008 Gray Book.

What issues are important to the audience?

Last year's update was issued on 10/18/07: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=174873,00.html Assume a similar timing this year.

Correct and correct. Perhaps you can direct the participant to this DOL generic discussion of QDRO's: http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/Publications/qdros.html