david rigby

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.

I assume "projected earning assumption" refers to (something like) the FAS ROA rate, and/or the funding interest rate. They are similar, at least pre-PPA, but not necessarily identical. Although not clear, the orginal question may be asking for the difference between a FAS discount rate and a FAS ROA rate. The best place to start is the definitions in FAS87.

Is this the DOL "ruling" to which you refer? http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/regs/fab_2007-1.html

Some of us are old enough to find this question a bit silly. That is because we were in school when they still taught proper English grammar, parts of speech, parts of the sentence, and (horrors!) sentence diagramming. Of course, the answer is "an".

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=174873,00.html

Don't you have to return to basics, and ask how you "designed the classification"?

In case this phrasing is ambiguous to you, "push out" means "encourage to take a distribution".BTW, call the IRS at 1-800-TAXFORM and order a (free) copy of Publications 575 and 590.

I agree with Andy. However, I heard exactly the same story about TPF&C when I worked for Hewitt in the late 70's.

Note that that is a PBGC reg, not IRS.

Depends on how well the freeze amendment is written. Normally, "freeze" means no new entrants.

Earlier white paper from the economists at the Treasury Department.http://www.treasury.gov/offices/economic-p...urve_020705.pdf

Hold on now! This was issued by the IRS, not by "you EA's".

Did you just state that all Enrolled Actuaries are insane? (I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking.)

Mike's conjecture is a good one, and consistent with the goal of bringing the various interest and mortality bases in line: use the arithmetic average of the q's from the IRC430 table. But, we are dealing with the government here: common sense does not always rule.