david rigby

See IRS Reg. 1.401(a)-20, Q&A-25 http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-....26&idno=26

Sometimes the word "consulting" implies an independent contractor relationship rather than an employee relationship. Are you an employee?

The original questioner probably should be concerned, at least a little, to make sure that whoever gives instruction is authorized to do so (which is what the recordkeeper should do for every client/plan).

Be very careful about vesting.

Revenue Ruling 2007-67: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/rr2007-67.end.pdf

Words can be important. The confusing word here is "converted". It appears that nothing has changed w/r/t the plan. The relevant change is your employment status. That is the date at which your vesting status was determined. It also appears the plan administrator has made a distribution to you, and defaulted to make that distribution directly as an IRA rollover. If so, that IRA is now yours. You may find it useful to have a copy of IRS Publication 590 (call 1-800-TAX-FORM).

What is the point of such design? It does not encourage higher levels of deferral. Why not amend it to match real deferrals, or just make it a safe harbor contribution?

Is this it? http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/0511015.pdf

You could try the SC website: http://www.sctax.org/default.htm Another source of information (hardly "proof" of anything) is how Prudential withholds: http://www.prudential.com/media/managed/St...Withholding.pdf A third source of information is to search these Message Boards. In particular, you will find some contributors who suggest the mandatory withholding for any state is zero due to federal ERISA pre-emption.

Start with this; review that agreement. (The Plan does have such agreement, doesn't it?) The Plan's ERISA counsel should be your first phone call.

Likely the plan excludes collectively bargained employees of the employer. If this person is a CB EE of a different employer, then the exclusion would not apply. But make sure that the other employer is not part of the same controlled group as the current employer.

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=27738

(a) No comment. (b) IMHO, there is a near-zero chance that legislation will pass to postpone the effective date(s).

Reminder: If you determine that the participant is deceased, don't forget about the QPSA, and any other death benefit the plan may contain.

Data as of 31-OCT-07 Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 5.62 5.62 Aa 6.01 5.82 5.92 A 6.07 6.07 6.07 Baa 6.36 6.57 6.47 Avg 6.15 6.02 6.09 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 4.00 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 4.34 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 4.74

IMHO, this is a reasonable request. However, the auditor may have to accept that documentation for a 20-year retiree is not readily available; no harm in looking.

Several prior discussion. The Search function is recommended. For example, http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=36712

One hopes that we are not in a situation where the IA is explaining to the actuary "mathcing assets and liabilities". That should be your expertise. In general, matching or immunization works best when the group is large (duh, general actuarial priniciples). That does not exclude it from this situation, but caution is advised, especially since (it appears from your plan specs) the actual retirement age can impact the plan's liability. Might be prudent to mention that to the plan sponsor and/or the IA. BTW, does this IA expect to reap some commission on any immunizing transaction?

Maybe. Probably best to direct this question to the plan's legal counsel. (You don't want to get your legal advice from this website.)

http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=33713

Is it possible that the spouse did not respond due to non-receipt of info? or death? (Plan sponsor may be able to resolve that ambiguity in about 3 minutes.)

Don't hold your breath.

IRS publications here: http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/lists/0,,id=97819,00.html

A few prior discussions on similar topics. for example, http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=23731 For others, you might try the Search feature.

Is the individual permitted to deduct a corporate expense? Methinks there are facts not yet in evidence.