david rigby

I'm shocked! Shocked!Sounds like this sponsor should have a different type of plan.

Is this an Early Retirement window? If so, you can discriminate in favor of NHCE's, but the preferred method is to identify the "target" employees by something other than name, such as classification, department, age and service, combination of above factors, etc.

The first sentence from Qdrophile is the key. Federal regulators are not particularly happy to see violations of this. Of course, this is the reason ERISA required a plan to be a written document. Perhaps you can mention this point to your management. As stated, you may be able to amend the plan prospectively.

If you want to confirm Tom's comment, you can search these Message Boards for more background and commentary.

Upper right corner. click on "Options", then "standard".

Don't delete. Please show your answer, and references. Leaving it here will make it a reference for others in the future.

Is this plan covered by IRC 411? could this plan be sponsored by a governmental organization? Is collective bargaining relevant? If so, even if no other impediment, it may not be possible to make such change without agreement by the bargaining unit.

I have no problem notifying Jim Holland, but why would the EA need to sue the sponsor? I'm just curious.

Good comments. I suggest returning to Effen's first question. Plan changes/design should always be preceded by reasonable discussion of "what are you trying to accomplish?"

I think this is a plan termination, but we need more facts and circumstances.

I agree, except that this should be deduct.

Difficult, since he is dead.

That post is a good read. Effen makes good suggestions. However, it may help to ask the opinion of the Joint Board (the Executive Director, not the staff) to look for suggestions. Shining a bright light on this is a good idea. Of course, after you have informed the plan sponsor. Many readers here would love to know the outcome of this.

However, the plan may be terminated. A plan cannot exist w/o a sponsor, so the "demise" of the company may automatically terminate the plan. A thorough analysis of the facts and circumstances of "...ceased doing business..." is appropriate.

IMHO, that is not what Q&A9 is saying. It does not say "404(a)(7) does not apply"; you still have the 25% deduction limit, but only w/r/t the DB contribs.

....meanwhile, consider the possibility of looking for another job.

Gray Book QUESTION 91-22 If an amendment increasing benefits or decreasing benefits is adopted and effective after the valuation date and during the plan year, how should that amendment be reflected in computing the full funding limitation? RESPONSE Under Rev. Rul. 77-2, the employer has an option to disregard any amendment that is adopted after the valuation date during the plan year. Although the amendment can be disregarded for that year, it must be taken into account in subsequent years. If, however, the employer chooses to take the amendment into account for the plan year, Rev. Rul. 77-2 provides that the charges and credits to the funding standard account "shall reflect the change in such benefit structure for the portion of the plan year subsequent to the effective date of the change." For most of the charges and credits to the funding standard account, this rule results in a (weighted) averaging of the charges and the credits before and after the change. With respect to the computation of the full funding limitation and the special credit for the full funding limitation, however, the IRS is currently considering whether the nature of that computation and credit could be determined in the same manner. Thus, it is uncertain at this time whether the appropriate procedure is to: 1) determine the full funding limitation based on the benefit structure in effect as of the end of the plan year, or 2) determine the full funding limitation based on the benefit structure in effect as of the beginning of the year and based on the benefit structure in effect as of the end of the year and to take a weighted average of these amounts.

http://www.benefitscounsel.com/archives/001783.html

Hold meetings? Written documentation of the benefit application? Written documentation of the actions?

good point. Q is correct.

If not, and if the plan sponsor agrees, the plan can be amended to add this, assuming such provision applies to all participants over NRA.

Not disagreeing with prior comments, I suggesst the company (and/or the estate) should discuss all of these issues with its own competent ERISA counsel. Decisions are not the prerogative of the TPA.

I agree that this is unlikely, but it is possible under the terms of the plan.

February 28, 2007 Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 5.25 5.25 Aa 5.61 5.58 5.60 A 5.78 5.73 5.76 Baa 6.01 6.31 6.16 Avg 5.80 5.72 5.69 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 4.47 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 4.53 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 4.73 Moody's Daily Public Utility Common Stock Yield Averages Price 323.76 Yield 3.37 New Dividend 10.90

Are there any NHCE's? Be sure whatever action you take does not result in violation of 401(a)(4).