david rigby

Make no presumptions until obtaining a copy of the basic plan doc.

Yeah, the familiar "what does the plan say?" If the plan does not easily answer your question, perhaps it's time to amend it for clarity.

First, go to the head of this Forum at https://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?/forum/89-qualified-domestic-relations-orders-qdros/, then search for "withholding". See whether any prior discussions help you. If withholding is applied, it would seem that does not alter the participant's child support obligation. Normally, the "participant" is (probably) entitled to elect a withholding other than the default. However, the agency is the payee, not the participant, so that may alter who gets to make a withholding election. So, does the plan give the participant or the payee the withholding election? The PA may want an opinion from its ERISA attorney. (The TPA should not make this decision.)

When you consider/take Larry's advice, please include (perhaps only one or two sentences) a reminder that family changes since the original designation (marriage, divorce, etc.) make it important to carefully review/change the elected beneficiary designation.

Eventually, yes.

A QDRO can establish an ex-spouse to be treated the same as a spouse for purposes of the QPSA. Of course, other factors might be relevant; for example, whether the participant was vested. IMHO, the plan/plan administrator/sponsor should not take sides.

I'm with Kristina on this one, at least partially. Sure it may be described as PITA, but don't overlook other factors. Those factors are beyond the control of the PA, but consider the possibility they are also beyond the control of the participant. If possible, this might be a time when the PA might consider going beyond reliance on technology and deadlines, and look for someone (such as a current employee) who might be able to reach out with a human touch.

Assuming such a fee requirement and assuming a DB plan, what would the plan administrator do if the participant and/or the AP refuse to pay the fee?

Who is "we"?

Implied in the original question is a policy of charging a fee for any participant, not just the AP, who applies for a benefit. If so, Effen's answer provides the correct advice.

Data as of July 31, 2018 (Tuesday) Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 3.89 3.89 Aa 4.13 4.04 4.09 A 4.31 4.22 4.27 Baa 4.69 4.89 4.79 Avg 4.38 4.26 4.32 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 2.78 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 2.90 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 3.05

BTW, was there a prior qualified plan? if so, were the participants given 100% vesting?

I think so. However, the sponsor may be able to accomplish its goal by including payment at NRD (ie, while still employed) as an available option. BTW, this may also be a useful method of encouraging "phased retirement". Consult your pension actuary for more information.

It's unclear the role played by the original poster. Don't forget to review the plan provisions. Other examples of this issue can be found by using the search box above, with "murder" or "slayer". Nevertheless, advice from QDROphile and FGC is useful. The Plan Administrator should make sure to discuss with ERISA counsel. Just my opinion, using ERISA counsel will be preferable to other counsel, because the ERISA attorney is more familiar with pre-emption issues and may have already researched the slayer statue issues.

Wrong? That a pretty broad summary. I suggest the current actuary discuss with the prior actuary (assuming he/she is available).

Did he work for a governmental employer?

OK, I missed that. Of course, the portion going to an IRA will also be taxable (eventually).

At the risk of solving this problem simply, so what? Pay the tax.

Still ambiguous. The title of the thread says "sole participant", so who are "others"?

The attorneys don't decide! See comments above.

Consider also that many non-ERISA plans contain language required under ERISA. It's possible this plan already contains some "anti-cutback" provision.

Please don't overlook this piece of advice.

Data as of 06/29/2018 (Friday) Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 3.93 3.93 Aa 4.12 4.09 4.11 A 4.27 4.28 4.28 Baa 4.69 4.98 4.84 Avg 4.36 4.32 4.34 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 2.66 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 2.79 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.94

Could this fall into the group of grandfathered 401(k) plans?

What type of plan is this? Defined benefit? Defined Contribution? Multiple plans? Also, let's be careful about terminology: when you say "approved QDRO" do you mean approved by the court? This is important because the court issues a DRO, but it is reviewed and approved by the plan administrator, at which time it becomes a QDRO.