david rigby

Can the plan administrator issue a loan contract (OK, "issue" is not the correct term) that is in violation of the plan provisions?

My read of the W2 instructions http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/iw2w3.pdf indicates prominent use of the word "employee". If Directors are employees, then perhaps the W2 is the appropriate form; however, that is not my understanding of the relationship between company and director. Perhaps a 1099MISC ?

Will this work? Amend the plan to permit lump sum distributions at NRD, even if still employed. (Might already be there.) Take that distribution, as a direct rollover. Freeze the plan so there are no more accruals. The result is a plan with no benefits, no assets, no participants. Then terminate it.

Only "affected" participants. That means those who are affected by whatever action/transaction gives rise to a partial termination.

I don't see how a plan could make such a charge. BTW, is the plan paying the expense? should it? Perhaps the plan sponsor could charge, but why do so? The determination of the benefit is a part of having the plan in the first place. This discussion might be relevant. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=20684

Andy, if you need additional counsel, even for a second opinion, I can recommend very good ERISA attorneys from several firms, in at least 3 states.

Enrolled Actuary Posse ?

Multiple postings of the same question. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=26155&hl=

Four to five pounds? No expert, but I thought proposed regulations did not carry the force of law unless they were also issued as temporary regulations, which is sometimes the case. Have also heard one practioner state (approximately) "proposed regs bind the IRS but do not bind the individual". Probably not possible to generalize completely about how to advise a plan sponsor. Each reg, and each situation, should be analyzed in light of its facts and circumstances.

Perhaps one document written to encompass two different plans? (BTW, not a good idea.)

Yeah, and.... be careful about proper interpretation of the plan provisions. You appear to use the terms "award" and "distribution" interchangeably. Is it possible that the plan states a DRO (no Q) permits immediate distribution from certain sources but requires later distribution (upon EE severance of employment?) from other sources? That scenario may not be valid, but be careful.

AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE !!!!!!!!!!!

I think (2) is the correct reference.

Reproduced? If you mean "copied", then the answer is "nowhere". If you want copies of prior forms (hand-print version), try calling 1-800-TAXFORM and be specific about which year(s) you want. You can get the instructions also, or from the website above. If you want computer-printed forms, you will need to buy that service from a vendor.

Might there be other professional groups who have some "influence"? For example, if the "questionable practioner" were also a licensed CPA or attorney, would it be of value to identify this to the appropriate professional society? (Perhaps the answer depends on whether we talking about fraud vs. incompetence.)

I don't have any idea what this is about. Please start over. List facts (disguised for your own privacy as necessary), and chronology.

Huh?

Search these Message Boards for prior discussions, using such possible search words as "missing participant", "lost", etc.

Did Katherine say that? See IRC 411(a)(10). Participants with 3+ years of vesting service should be given the option for electing a vesting schedule. Any participants with less than 3 years are exempt from that requirement.

My interpretation is that (f)(1) is intended to apply to transfers during a computation period. (g) extends the issue to plan changes. Either way, a change (or transfer) that occurs on the first day of the plan year would make the point moot. Is that reasonable?

I'm not. In the original post, the change occurred on 1/1/03, which we presume is the first day of a plan year. I think 1.401(a)-7(f)(1)(i)(B) is the greater of 1 or 1. I agree with the answer of 2.

Don't take the assignment. Run. Very fast.

This is part of the 401(L) safe harbor. Is it part of the 401(a)(4) safe harbor?

These discussions might be relevant. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=2931 http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=21324 The plan should be getting advice from its ERISA counsel.

Oops, I should rephrase for clarity. I should have said the sponsor did not want me to do the Sch.B (because I wanted a fee). Therefore, X volunteered to do it.