david rigby

Strictly answering the questions posed in the original post: Yes and Yes. However, the assets in the plan's trust are owned by the plan, not by the plan sponsor, so corporate bankruptcy should not mean the plan assets are impaired.

IRC 414(p) does not contain the word "divorce" or the phrase "dissolution of marriage". Of course a QDRO can be issued if the parties are still married. However, in the case above, what is the reasoning for the parties to bear the cost of obtainging a QDRO, when the plan (as described above) does not care about "legal separation"? If the plan has no ambiguities, why fix something that isn't broken? BTW, in my state (NC), there is no definition of "legal separation".

No expert I, but might there be some "inexact" terminology? That is, what is meant by "survivor annuity"? Does it refer to something triggered upon death prior to retirement/commencement? Or triggered upon death after retirement/commencement? Perhaps your meaning of that phrase differs from the meaning used by the OPM? Just asking; make sure you start on the same page.

... and the lobbying effort has been pretty high. This is one recent letter https://www.americanbenefitscouncil.org/pub/?id=7135af29-dd10-6e4f-6362-20d794d1329e

The spouse might also consider: 1. There will probably be a fee to effect this transfer/rollover. 2. There might be some positive diversification associated with leaving it alone (depending, of course on how it's currently invested and other investment offerings).

Has that been your experience reading posts here?

Well, you can amend a plan but you always have to be concerned with anti-cutback issues. If your proposed amendment would provide a LS basis on the 12/31/08 portion of the AccBen that is equal or greater than the current plan provision, then it would be permitted. However, it appears you are suggesting something else, so "What Mike said."

I agree, with the usual caveat: What does the plan say?

Have I missed something? Isn't there a need to inspect plan A to determine whether B employees are eligible automatically?

This is characteristic of most DB plans. Perhaps with a little more infop from the original poster, we can help.

Moody's Daily Bond Yields - Data as of 08/31/17 (Thursday) Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 3.59 3.59 Aa 3.63 3.70 3.67 A 3.81 3.85 3.83 Baa 4.18 4.34 4.26 Avg 3.87 3.87 3.87 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 1.44 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 1.85 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.52

Yes of course, the sponsor should consider amending the plan for some better identification of procedure(s). But the current situation may demand an immediate action, and the committee is probably the vehicle to address the immediate need.

Absent any relevant plan provision, I agree that the logical "next in line" is the beneficiary's estate. However, if there is nothing on point in the plan, perhaps the committee (as defined in the plan) should create a "policy statement" prior to making the payment(s).

Just when you figured out how to navigate the old website, there is a new design, effective today, https://www.irs.gov/

OK, I get it. Some circumstances make it worthwhile. Thnx.

Do you have a Summary Plan Description? (casually referred to as a "plan booklet")

OK, I ask to be instructed. How is it defined in the plan?

Don't do it, at least not into a DB plan.

Do you mean guaranteed payments from the LLC? Is this a death benefit (i.e., triggered only on the death of the employee/partner)?

Hey, I'm 42. Same as last year. You should try it.

Occasionally?

jpod is correct, there are two issues in the original post: 1. How to handle the 5-year rule, and what to do if it has been "violated". 2. The termination of the plan is/will be a distributable event. The Plan Administrator may wish to be a little creative in getting the beneficiary to respond (have you confirmed this person is still alive?), by sending certified mail. Such letter might strongly suggest the account will be distributed by X date. The PA might also consider how to proceed if no response is received: check? default IRA? etc.

Yep. https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/solar/2024-april-8 https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/best-cities-to-visit-next-solar-eclipse-2024

Technically, I think any change to plan year must be adopted prior to the new YE. If you have a YE 11/28/15, the next PY begins 11/29/15, no matter what is the PYE.

I just got back from driving to see totality. Awesome, glorious. All adjectives are inadequate. I totally geeked out. If you've never seen it, I urge you to begin planning for 2024.