david rigby

I doubt the document is silent on this. It may be indirect, but it is likely the current document will provide guidance. However, that does not mean the answer will be black-and-white; any "grayness" should be evaluated in tandem with any prior administrative experience and/or other material (such as SPD).

Ah, selling it and getting it by your underwriters, are two different things.

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=37851

You can look at the FAFSA form here: www.fafsa.ed.gov. Skimming, I noticed that it requests IRA contributions that affect your taxable income (or that of your parents); therefore, Roth IRA contributions are irrelevant. Also, I did not see anywhere that it requested the balance of any IRA accounts (but I was only skimming). Be aware that the FAFSA is a high-level overview. Lots of detail it does not request. Individual colleges, or scholarship applications, may request more detail.

Is anything here helpful? http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/jpmorgan/am/...etirement_plans

Several previous discussions on this or similar topics. Try the Search feature, using keyword such as: embezzle, embezzlement, fraud.

Don't know if any reg addresses this, but check regs under IRC 401(a)(9). There has probably been a prior discussion on these Message Boards, so try the Search feature. More generally, most plans will state (sometimes indirectly) that a payment form cannot change once it has begun. I've seen some plans amended to add this feature, but it is extremely(!) rare, and must be done on a non-discriminatory basis. Note that the use of such feature is voluntary by the participant, not decided by the plan administrator. Spouse signoff is also advised.

Is this an absolute, or is there conditional language in the PS plan, in case the DB plan is unable to provide the TH accrual?

Will amending the plan to permit in-service distributions accomplish the goal? (That is, no loan.)

Data as of 30-JUN-08 Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 5.60 5.60 Aa 6.10 5.89 6.00 A 6.32 6.41 6.37 Baa 6.87 7.21 7.04 Avg 6.43 6.28 6.36 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 2.96 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 3.67 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 4.47

I agree with Mike. Perhaps there are some facts not yet in evidence? Of course, you can wrap the formula in the fractional rule.

Just in case you have not seen this, scroll down until you get to Chapter 10, What to do if you have problems. http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/publications/wyskapr.html

The Society of Actuaries and BenefitsLink have pages for posting job opportunities. http://www.soa.org/careers/landing.aspx http://employeebenefitsjobs.com/jobs/by_date.stm There may be others.

Does wikipedia help? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accounting_methods

Is it delayed salary, or is the owner planning to pay himself a bonus at some later date?

Perhaps it is worth considering a few other issues that could be relevant: - (1) When is a participant entitled to a distribution? For some plans, it might be "end of quarter following separation of employment", or "end of plan year following ...". Don't assume it is "immediate" unless you already know. - (2) What is the process for completing a distribution? Most plans have some "paperwork". This is reasonable, and is for the protection of both the plan and the participant, to ensure the proper entitlement, address, name, etc. Often this process means a little extra time, but not a lot. - (3) The plan sponsor may be checking its records to make sure no QDRO is "in play". - (4) As Janet says, what is the frequency for processing payments? - (5) Most plans will offer a cash payment (minus automatic tax withholding) or a direct rollover to an IRA. It usually anticipates the participant will make an affirmative election of either, thus making it part of (2) above. - Other issues I've forgotten?

http://thomas.loc.gov/ Search by Bill Number: HR3361 or S1974

Correct. See IRC 415(b)(5), and don't forget to read subparagraph ©: http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-A-1-D-I-B-415.html

Note cross reference in PPA section 906 to IRC 7701(a)(40): Thus, claiming to be a tribe may not be sufficient, since the Secretary of the Treasury, and Secretary of the Interior, get to decide which group is a legitimate tribe. This point may be relevant because there are some "disputed" tribes.

I think there is something in PPA06 that specifies plans of Indian tribal governments are to be treated analogously to plans of state and local governments. (Sorry, don't have the text handy.)

Possibly, but it may be hasty to assume "violation". For example, we don't know the circumstances that led to: Nevertheless, Mike's suggestion to review EPCRS, and Joyce Kahn, seems appropriate. Seems likely that the IRS has dealt with this question before.

From About BenefitsLink: I'm pretty sure this website is not for the purpose of sharing fee information. What do you think?

I could find nothing on point in the Gray Book (searched all years).

The attorneys would tell us this "assumes facts not in evidence". The original post did not say anything about serving in the military, or being on leave to serve in the military. Nevertheless, good advice to make sure a distributable event has occurred.

This principle may be relevant when discussing governmental plans, but if it's an ERISA plan, this is nonsense. Both IRC 411(d)(6) and the corresponding regulations refer to "participant".