david rigby

Ditto to all of Effen's comments. However, it's very important to have this discussison with the auditor. For example, if you think a reasonable rate should be X%, and the plan sponsor wants a higher rate, it's possible the auditor will express an opinion that helps your argument.

Just my opinion: I suggest NO ONE answer this question on this Board. If the sponsor is upset about being charged a fee, the first question is "what does the service agreement say?". Charging a small fee is generally considered reasonable (i'm not defining "small"), assuming permitted by the service agreement. The corollary issue might be the amount of the requested fee. If so, the sponsor might wish to "take a survey" by calling a few TPA's (or the new TPA can do so) to ask about this fee/process in general, just for a market-based comparison. Lastly, the sponsor might find the fee is negotiable. Suggest an alternative amount?

Duplicate post. Please put replies at this location: https://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?/topic/61456-alternate-payee-rmd/&tab=comments#comment-300207

You mean, like "pension simplification"?

Get paid in advance!

Notice 2020-07 was issued today. PS. Amend the plan to use October or November rates!

That sounds like it might be another QDRO, rather than an amended one. Make sure you seek competent legal advice that has experience in QDROs.

My understanding is that 1099's are issued for distributions, but the payment you describe is a transfer. No 1099 needed. You may want to review the 1099R instructions, just in case. Also, I believe there is a previous Q&A on point, somewhere in this Forum.

Read here.

I recommend re-reading Effen's advice/comments. A few other points as corollary to his advice: All above discussion appears to assume the plan is subject to ERISA. Some plans, notably those sponsored by a governmental organization, are exempt from most provisions of ERISA, including QDROs, although some voluntarily include ERISA-like provisions in the plan document. If not already done, this is the first question you need to answer. (State law has much more impact on governmental plans than on ERISA plans.) Any beneficiary election for life insurance, 401(k) plan, stock, etc. will not be relevant to the pension plan unless the pension plan is specifically included. Divorce may or may not automatically change a prior beneficiary election. QJSA means "the spouse is the beneficiary"; this means a QJSA for an unmarried participant is automatically something else (probably a life-only annuity or a life annuity with a 10-year guarantee). However, some plans allow a participant to elect another option called "contingent annuity" that functions like a QJSA but allows a non-spouse contingent annuitant (and such person must be specified at the time of retirement). Terminology can be important. Likely, you need legal advice, quickly. I suggest using an attorney with ERISA experience (in my observation, divorce/family law attorneys usually don't measure up). My own database does not include any Ohio attorneys, but Effen lives in Western PA and can probably recommend some attorneys in your area.

Depends. What is the definition of Normal Retirement Age (not Normal Retirement Date)?

Look for a new CPA?

Perhaps this is unrelated to the terms of the plan document, but is a problem/error with how this deferral amount is being reflected within the payroll system. Check to see what system code(s) are being used. If those codes are correct, then ask the payroll vendor.

In case a reader is unsure about the above italicized reference, the OP is quoting IRS Reg. 1.415(e)-3(ii)(B). I wonder what the Plan says.

Just my opinion, but that does not conform to the definition within ASC715, although it could (accidentally) provide a reasonable rate. Have you reviewed that definition? However, in the real world, the discount rate selected might be a compromise, usually involving input from the actuary, the auditor, and the sponsor. Note that some auditors don't exhibit much flexibility. ?

The Plan is required to have QDRO procedures, and procedures must be "reasonable". Maybe it's just me, but 3 years does not seem reasonable. The DOL has 3 different FAQ documents about QDROs here. The Pension Rights Center has some information and links here. You probably need an attorney who is well-versed in QDROs.

Engage an attorney? BTW, if you seek legal advice, and that person isn't intimately familiar with QDROs, keep looking.

Caution, while it might be "...not enough to make this a controlled group as a whole...", it's possible some of the "...variety of businesses..." are a controlled group. This probably does not change Luke's advice, but you will probably want to retain documentation of which companies are/are not members of a CC.

Data as of December 31, 2019 (Tuesday) Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 3.04 3.04 Aa 3.26 3.02 3.14 A 3.44 3.36 3.40 Baa 3.76 4.03 3.90 Avg 3.49 3.36 3.43 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 1.61 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 1.79 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.30 Observation: (1) Comparing the Avg rates to 6 months prior, current rates are about 30 points lower. (2) Comparing the Avg rates to 12 months prior, current rates are about 90-100 points lower.

Not sure about the meaning here. ?

Just a point of clarification, in case it hasn't been clear: The court/judge provides a DRO. It is not a QDRO until the Plan Administrator approves it. For this reason, it's common that the parties/attorneys prepare a draft for review by the PA before going to the court. Sometimes, a second draft is needed.

For reference, has the new actuary contributed any suggested answers to your questions?

Just curious: is 401(a)(17) relevant?

Yeah but, …. we've seen lots of confusion about this. Sometimes, the participant/AP thinks a "separate interest" DB benefit is an "account". Better to ask than to assume. No disrespect intended, but I'm still not convinced the questioner knows the diff.

As implied above, might be relevant, especially to the time of payment: is the plan a defined benefit (DB) plan or defined contribution (DC) plan?