david rigby

Because that Google search did not produce a direct result. I'm shocked, shocked! The UP84 table can be found here, and is table number 831. Do your own setback. Assuming that "1994 Group Annuity Reserving Table projected to 2002" refers to the unisex table in Rev. Ruling 2001-62, find it here.

Try the links in this thread http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=27582, except you can ignore a Google search.

Is that a double negative?

Since these Message Boards are authority (aren't they?), then we get to decide.

Size matters.

Until we hear more, let's call him a "consultant". Let him earn the removal of the quotes.

What does this mean?

WDIK, OK, but I am surprised. My experience was that no company wanted to sell one deferred annuity, although perhaps there was a minimum size in their requirements. In your situation, was the purchased annuity large (by whatever standards) or with a short deferral period?

Note that several places in ERISA and the IRC state that governmental plans are exempt, but must still comply with pre-ERISA IRC. See for example, IRC 411(e)(2).

To elaborate/consolidate above answers, you have to offer what the plan says, which is to provide the accrued benefit as defined in the plan. To do so would probably require that the plan purchase a (fully-paid) deferred annuity, which begins at the NRD and with all the plan's relevant provisions (early retirement, optional forms, QPSA, etc.). Most documents will also include a lump sum option upon plan termination, but it is not required. The reference to 417 above is to note the additional regulatory requirement that the offer of a lump sum must also include an immediate annuity as an option. On a practical note, you will not find an insurance company willing to sell a deferred annuity on an individual basis. Therefore, any EE who chooses the deferred annuity option may have to be given the equivalent immeidate annuity. As Blinky implies, this choice is unlikely, but I have seen it happen.

You need to renegotiate your fee?

I thought this kind of wrap worked the other direction.

Some of us are blocked from eBay by our company network. Can you post this as an attachment?

I make it a point to agree with MGB, especially when he is right, as now. Similar discussion. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=19190

IRS Publication 590: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p590.pdf

Now? Wouldn't that be a cutback under 411(d)(6)? Check plan provisions?

I reproduced your numbers exactly.

Effen's request for clarification is valid. However, let me try: What is probably meant is that the sponsor of one or more employee benefit plans is being acquired. If so, it is essential that the buy-sell agreement be carefully examined. (Preferably, someone with EE benefits experience will have input before the agreement is finalized, but that is ususally a crapshoot.) There are many variations of result. But whatever the form (usually, the seller retains the plan responsibility or the buyer gets it), the plan(s) must continue to be operated according to the terms of the document. The buy-sell might specify something specific, thus it must be examined. Much more discussion is possible, but that is the nutshell.

Not trying to deviate from the "simple life", but there are three possible limits: - 402(g) limit, mentioned above, - plan imposed limit, - limit reached via the ADP test. The catch-up contribution "kicks in" at the lowest of these limits.

Does anyone have any additional information on this topic?

Adjustment? Not sure what you mean. Just use the definition of actuarial equivalent in the plan. Do you want it checked? Post the definition and the factor, and someone will respond.

so what the H-E-double-hockey-sticks?

Carol Calhoun's website may have something, or a link to something that may help you. http://benefitsattorney.com/modules.php?name=Web_Links

Correct. Before going down the road to anguish of a non-deductible contribution, careful analysis by a qualified actuary is in order. You don't have to give the details here if you don't want to, but we will be glad to help if you do.

Agreed. Perhaps not relevant, but has anyone checked this lump sum against 415 limits?