david rigby

You guys could avoid all these problems with celebrations if you would just join me in supporting the Braves.

I agree. Don't see any "distribution event."

Yes.

Get one of these: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p590.pdf 1-800-TAX-FORM. See page 58.

Maybe? - Death. - Taxes. - Cal Ripken. - Braves win the Division. - Braves don't make the World Series.

I always recommend this starting point when searching for information: http://benefitslink.com/buzz/new.html

freeERISA.com is a great resource, but it will have limited free access, generally only showing the prior two years. You can get other access for a fee, or a paid search. If you need actual copies of prior forms, probably only the DOL will be the appropriate source.

The confusion continues. Why are you still discussing baseball? The season has been over for several days.

Some reading: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=5508 http://www.watsonwyatt.com/us/pubs/insider...ent=The+Insider

It is my understanding that a plan or an amendment can discriminate against HCEs (or even among them), so establishing a maximum life insurance level (more properly, is that establishing a maximum death benefit?) should be permitted.

Note that under current indexing procedures (ignoring EGTRRA sunset provisions), it is likely that these limits will change every year.

Why? Did you tell sponsor the opposite? Before hand-wringing, don't forget to look at the dollar impact. If the unvested amounts are not much, then don't consider it the end of the world. Perhaps a viable perspecitve is to communicate to the EEs: "although we were not required to vest these amounts, we did so anyway...."

Such a big question. And open-ended. Many things of concern, including - whether terminating the plan is the best course of action, - what action is leading to termination? - is bankruptcy an issue? - is a collective bargaining agreement relevant? - any potential violations of plan provisions and/or regulations, and how significant, (for example, top-heavy or non-discrimination rules)? - any insurance contracts involved? - any unpaid ER contributions? - any unpaid EE contributions? - is plan sponsor being acquired? - is an audit required? - all 5500 filings up-to-date? - nature of the asset investments, and how easily they can be converted for distribution. Etc. I probably have omitted many items. Consider engaging an expert who has done this before?

Candidate for suggestion for 2005 Gray Book? http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=26262

Segal's announcement is (of course) not official. But not difficult to derive. See chart at bottom of page 5 of Winter 2003 Enrolled Actuaries Report, http://www.actuary.org/ear/pdf/winter_2003.pdf. For example, to increase the 401(a)(17) limit, the increase in indexing was only 1.1%. The IRS announcement of 2004 limits was issued in October 2003, so expect the 2005 limits soon.

You can find PLRs back to 1997 here: http://www.irs.gov/foia/lists/0,,id=97705,00.html

Several prior discussion threads that might be relevant. Perhaps the Search feature would help. For example, http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=11025

When a plan terminates, the sponsor usually spends some (but not infinite) effort to locate missing participants. If still not located, the sponsor may have: - "paid" the distribution, but used 100% tax withholding (not a recommended course of action, but it happens), - "forfeited" the amounts. This amounts to ignoring the participants, and promising to pay if they ever show up. - established an account somewhere (such as an IRA), - if J&S rules apply, purchase an annuity (not likely since an insurance company probably will insist on having a real signature from the participant). The participant should contact the plan sponsor and ask. Name, SSN, former address will be useful pieces of information. Caution 1. Before assuming there is a distribution coming, the participant should be certain she/he is (at least partially) vested. Caution 2. If the original plan sponsor was acquired by another company, that does not necessarily mean the original plan was terminated.

Whether other TPA's require spousal consent in this situation is (generally) irrelevant. Pay attention to the plan provisions and the provisions in the IRS regs.

You might find value in prior discussions. Try the Search feature, using the word "overpayment".

1. Your use of the BNA-produced information was not my concern, but that someone may have put into public domain without authorization. Anyone else have this concern? Anyone care? 2. IMHO (which may not be worth much), a negative election percentage should be specified in the plan document. That said, I wonder if the document could include a range (say 1% to 3%), from which the plan administrator could pick; even if possible, it may not be advisable.

Uh.... might that language from BNA be copyrighted material? Did it come from a website for which you/someone paid an access fee?

The other choice is the CL rate for purposes of the Unfunded Current Liability. Prior to PFEA, the CL rate for this purpose was related to the CL for 412 purposes. Under PFEA, this issue may not be as important, although PFEA is temporary.

Logic? Tax code? Regulations? Any more questions?

I would not do anything additional for the Schedule B, since the 5500 itself will have some indication of disaster relief. If you feel the need anyway, the easiet solution might be to write in "Disaster Relief - Hurricane Charley" at the top of the B.