david rigby

There are 2 SS tax rates. 6.2% on wages up to the SSTWB, and 1.45% on all wages without limit (oversimplified).

Be careful about applying the 7.65% FICA savings rate. It will be only 1.45% for some EEs.

April 28, 2006 MOODY'S DAILY LONG-TERM CORPORATE BOND YIELD AVERAGES Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA* 5.95 5.95 Aa 6.12 608 6.10 A 6.37 6.33 6.35 Baa 6.61 6.86 6.74 Avg 6.37 6.31 6.34 MOODY'S DAILY TREASURY YIELD AVERAGES Short-Term (3-5 yrs): 4.87 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs): 5.00 Long-Term (10+ yrs): 5.27 MOODY'S DAILY PUBLIC UTILITY COMMON STOCK YIELD AVERAGES Price: 274.2 Yield: 3.84 New Dividend: 10.52

Are we certain the AP has the right to elect commencement now? BTW, what does the plan say?

I agree with Steve C. See discussion in the link posted above.

b2kates is correct. However, perhaps his use of "vested" and your use of "vested" are not equal. Vesting is generally controlled by the terms of the plan document. Many plans use a vesting schedule that is zero percent for the first 5 years, then 100%. Just as important, a "year of service for vesting" is often defined in the plan document as a plan year with at least 1000 hours worked. (This is a common definition. Not all plans use this.) Thus, you may have been awarded some stock for one or more years, but may not have met the plan terms for vesting. In other words, follow the terms of the plan document. Only you and the company know your work history. Check it out.

Perhaps I just can't read, but the 1:31 pm original post is rather generic and the 4:08 pm followup is rather specific. I agree that two rates are permitted if this refers to the PY beginning in 2005. Not if this refers to the PY beginning in 2006. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=31178

I handled this situation once by applying a credit (line 15b, I think) and attaching amended forms for prior years as documentation.

w/r/t the question of investing EE deferrals in the selected funds (issue #1 or issue # 2? I forget), has anyone bothered to check the plan document?

Since you state 412 and 404, let's assume this is an ERISA plan. Let's also assume the Reconciliation Account = zero. Generic: set your actual unfunded to zero (per Rev. Ruling 81-213, sec. 5.01), and create a gain/loss base of whatever is needed to balance. Have I misunderstood your question?

ERISA: Every Ridiculous Idea Since Adam TEFRA: Taxing Every Fiscally Responsible American got more?

Anyone have information (and/or a link) about the duration of the bonds that make up the Moody's Aaa and Aa indexes?

One hopes that the Plan Administrator (not the TPA) has "QDRO procedures". That might, for example, describe who has the authority to determine whether a DRO is a QDRO, as well as written documentation of what conclusion was reached, and why.

Any vesting schedule at least as generous as either of those mentioned by stephen.

That is the point. The alternate payee cares.

I read the original post to mean the QDRO was prepared at the time of divorce. If so, might counsel be at fault for failing to send it to the plan administrator? (Granted, we don't know "fault", but it's just a question.)

Not necessarily. Some of the relevant prior discussions: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=32041 http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=31945 You can search for more.

If the QDRO was completed several years ago but not presented until recently, and is later determined to be valid, it seems appropriate that it be applied prospectively only. Or does this matter? Or might there be some malpractice by the AP's counsel?

Perhaps you want to reread Rev. Ruling 77-2, especially section 2.02 and section 3.

I cannot imagine the sponsor wanting to make such statement to an employee.

Don't "lean". Decide!

Never underestimate the value of our intrepid webmaster: http://benefitslink.com/jobs/by_date.stm These postings may not contain salary, but it may take you to links where that information is available.

Just a few thoughts: What is the question? If the QDRO is valid, then what is the issue? The Plan does not have any choice here. Is the anger of the participant displaced, since he (and/or his attorney) looked at the QDRO when it was still in draft form? Why is the plan/sponsor trying to soothe this anger?

I agree with others. Publishable? Yes. GrayBook? No.

I would recommend the form be filed, every year. In my experience, it is the plan sponsor who has the most difficulty locating copies. Locating originals won't be any easier, so expecting them to locate several years of Bs and/or Ps is asking for trouble.