david rigby

1. The 5500 goes to the EBSA, not the IRS. 2. No govt agency is your collection agency. Not likely the EBSA will reject the form based due to failure to pay the preparer.

Published in October or November. Generally, based on end-of-September indexes.

I will sleep better knowing that the IRS has addressed this very important topic: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=161151,00.html

Updated composite corporate bond rates: http://www.irs.gov/retirement/article/0,,id=123229,00.html http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-06-75.pdf

IRS summary: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/rne_sum06.pdf IRS Rollover chart: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/rollover_chart.pdf

That probably takes care of your 410(b) issues, although I'm not sure it was the best course of action. However, the employee turnover may be so high that it provides little or no extra cost to the plan.

Is this what the plan states?

Isn't this an employee communciation issue more than a plan design issue? If the sponsor wants to give more in a PS plan, do so, and tell the employees that is your goal. Putting it in the plan is not worth the bother.

Does IRS Reg. 1.411(d)-4 Q&A2(b)(2)(v) help?

Duplicate postings. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=33039

This seems to be a question of proper plan definitions. If not clear, then maybe an amendment is in order. Also, does it matter? That is, does anyone get vested without having 5 full years?

Could the plan purchase an annuity, and could that annuity have a death benefit beyond the J&S (as permitted by the plan)?

If depends. If the plan purchases an annuity, probably not.

We did an independent calculation of the Corp bond rate and got 5.72% for the month, and 5.77% for the weighted average.

From the White House website, 08/04/06, "I look forward to signing this important legislation into law soon."

Is he receiving the 415 benefit? If not, amend the plan to increase the benefit, before purchasing the annuity.

Amend to increase the target benefit? Amend to add a PS feature?

We definitely won't see anything before it is signed. Jim Holland states that the IRS is keenly aware of the need for official guidance on the CL rates. For now, we should give them the benefit of the doubt; remember that PFEA was signed on a Saturday, and the IRS issued guidance on Monday. Pretty good.

Alternative: amend the plan to permit distribution to employees over 65 while still employed? (Asusming 65 is plan's NRA.)

Don't we all feel better knowing that the plaintiff attorneys got paid? I wonder what my next career will be?

I'm unsure the proposed amendment, as described above, would be OK, or whether it might be considered a 411(d)(6) violation. Even if a gray area, why would the sponsor want to be so harsh? What is the proposed freeze date? Will participants receive a "certified" benefit calculation? Will that calculation (certified or not) show the pre-hire assumed compensation? How much time will the participant have to respond to this? Practicality is useful here, as well as precedent. How much time/information is currently provided to a VT?

I'm surprised the plan does not have other language that covers those employed at the initial effective date of the plan.

July 31, 2006 MOODY'S DAILY LONG-TERM CORPORATE BOND YIELD AVERAGES Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA* 5.79 5.79 Aa 6.08 5.95 6.02 A 6.29 6.27 6.28 Baa 6.52 6.82 6.67 Avg 6.30 6.21 6.26 MOODY'S DAILY TREASURY YIELD AVERAGES Short-Term (3-5 yrs): 4.89 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs): 4.94 Long-Term (10+ yrs): 5.14 MOODY'S DAILY PUBLIC UTILITY COMMON STOCK YIELD AVERAGES Price: 298.3 Yield: 3.56 New Dividend: 10.61

Maybe the participant made a mistake. Maybe not. Good advice from PIP and Bird. But this might also be an opportunity to review the "navigability" of the website.

Could be someone used the wrong EIN on one or more forms. Could be that an illegal, working for your client, used a phony SSN that just happened to belong to someone else, and that illegal later became a VT.