david rigby

I second everything Andy said. BTW, here is one of the more "passionate" discussion threads: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=31437

There might be reasons to suggest a plan termination, but I can think of several reasons to argue against it. Just because another vendor is suggesting one thing is no reason to suggest the opposite. Perhaps you can offer advice to the prospect that will meet their needs.

I agree with mjb. Don't put "transfer" and "termination" in the same sentence. The sponsor should first determine what it wants to accomplish, before deciding on the mechanism. (BTW, if the plan is terminated, purchasing a group annuity may not be available under the terms of the plan document.)

Several other discussion threads on this topic, including links that may be helpful, and comments on the topic of ERISA preemption. Try the Search feature. For example, http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=31537

Ditto.

I'm shocked! Shocked!

Steve C is correct. The existence of OBRA FFC did not eliminate bases. IMHO, Q&A 94-7 is correct and sufficient.

This is not evidence of discrimination. It is evidence of rounding. Has rounding been consistent year-to-year?

I can't say it better than Gray Book 94-7: Disposition of Reconciliation Account Balance - 412 Can any of the components comprising the Schedule B Reconciliation account ever be eliminated and, if so, under what circumstances? For example, if a plan becomes fully funded for Current Liabilities, can the accumulated additional funding charges due to section 412(l) (Schedule B item 9(p)(i)) be transferred to the plan's credit balance? Similarly, can any or all of the Reconciliation account be eliminated or transferred to the credit balance when the 412©(7) full funding limit applies? RESPONSE: The reconciliation account should be eliminated only when the ERISA full funding limit applies and there is a full funding credit. In no event should the reconciliation account be added to the credit balance. Copyright © 1994, Enrolled Actuaries Meeting All rights reserved by Enrolled Actuaries Meeting. Permission is granted to print or otherwise reproduce a limited number of copies of the material on the diskette for personal, internal, classroom, or other instructional use, on the condition that the foregoing copyright notice is used so as to give reasonable notice of the copyright of the Enrolled Actuaries Meeting. This consent for free limited copying without prior consent of the Enrolled Actuaries Meeting does not extend to making copies for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for inclusion in new collective works, or for sale or resale.

Prior discussions: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=26247 http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=21929

Sorry, mine is proprietary. Assuming this is a PBGC-covered plan, have you reviewed Reg. 4041? http://www.pbgc.gov/practitioners/law-regu.../page13188.html Have I misunderstood your question?

This might help some, but I doubt it will increase participation. You need advance encouragement for that. How about a safe harbor match?

Might there be any plan provision which would trigger plan termination upon disqualification?

Why does the plan/PA need to make such inquiry? Does the plan need only reliable identification of the executor?

Not sure I agree w this. If NRD is defined as the attainment of age 62 and completion of 30 years, Bill has not yet met that set of criteria.

Your credit balance does not evaporate. In many cases after FF, the loss base will = the CB. I apologize if that is not what you asked.

Sure, you can use 7.65% even for those who will be well over the SS wage base. But you might find it difficult to explain why the savings on $2000 is $153 on March 1, but only $29 on December 31.

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.