david rigby

To original poster, please confirm: is this an ERISA plan?

Data as of November 30, 2015 (Monday) Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 3.99 3.99 Aa 4.18 4.17 4.18 A 4.37 4.40 4.39 Baa 5.52 5.30 5.41 Avg 4.69 4.47 4.58 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 1.39 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 1.93 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.73

He may not be a control freak. He may be unemployed, and lazy. (I've seen it.) But to your question, the plan/employer does not make decisions about a POA. Isn't that a matter for the court? No in this case, it's not, because the question really isn't about POA; it's really about the husband asking for rights to control the account (directly). Seems unlikely the plan permits that. (As my momma told me, don't look for ways to help fools make fools of themselves.)

Before anything else, does the plan answer either question?

Not even a nickel.

Just a thought: Some of the phrasing above might be a bit vague. If "the pension attorney" is employed by the city and/or the plan, then that person is not (necessarily) on your side. If so, you might consider whether you need your own legal counsel. If Carol is licensed in your state, you could do worse. If she isn't, she (or another reader) may be able to provide a referral.

Yeah, use of the term "honest mistake" might be a stretch.

Yes, and there is no need to inform the participant (via 1099) how much the plan paid for the annuity contract.

FYI, I live just down the road from this. The main hospital in this chain has a cancer center named for Mr. Davis. Clearly, he made lots of money, and then gave lots to the hospital.

1. Line 8d. Yes. 2. Assuming you mean the plan purchased a paid-up annuity (and this annuity contract provides 100% of the benefits payable), the plan does not produce any 1099R. The insurance company pays all participant benefits, and must provide the 1099.

Are the participants still employed by the controlled group?

I was a "tag-along" to an attorney discussion on a similar topic last year. I'm summarizing here: the attorneys referenced PTE 80-26 and an article written by the Groom law firm. The focus was on (1) what does the plan say, and (2) whether there was a de facto loan between the parties (ie, the plan and the sponsor). The conclusion reached was, "If there is a chance that the employer advances will not be reimbursed within 60 days, a written, no-interest loan agreement is required between the employer and the plan." If your prior expense is more than 60 days old, you may have a problem with the plan making that reimbursement, especially if there is nothing implying the plan will make a reimbursement (possibility under certain conditions). It's prudent to get the auditor's input, in advance.

If the check was made out to the plan (and if that is correct), then 100% of the $8000 belongs to the plan.

Check the document. I've seen plans that state the plan is automatically terminated if ... Although "bankruptcy" has not been mentioned, other conditions might apply.

There is an Ethics webcast by the Conference of Consulting Actuaries, Wednesday December 2. www.ccactuaries.org

Probably, you should address this question to the IRA custodian, in advance.

When is the plan termination date?

I don't see sinister motives, just simple: Save some budget $$.

It's cash. IMHO, the term "fringe benefit" was originally created to cover things that are not cash.

What does the plan say?

Can a sole proprietorship be presumed to be in existence at an earlier date? If so, does the presumption require any evidence?

Reasonable query. Peter, can you suggest an example where this would be legitimate? What "other EE-benefit purpose" would be acceptable? Are there parameters where the test of legitimacy would clearly fail? (I'm not asking for free legal advice, just looking for some generalities that can be a discussion basis.)

If rolled out, that implies the money is now in an IRA. IRA rules, not plan rules, will apply. Is there some way in which her company employment/termination is relevant?

Data as of 30-Oct-15 (Friday) Moody's Daily Long-term Corporate Bond Yield Averages Utilities Industrial Corporate Aaa NA 3.98 3.98 Aa 4.14 4.13 4.14 A 4.32 4.38 4.35 Baa 5.47 5.23 5.35 Avg 4.64 4.43 4.54 Moody's Daily Treasury Yield Averages Short-Term (3-5 yrs) 1.24 Medium-Term (5-10 yrs) 1.82 Long-Term (10+ yrs) 2.66

No where in the original post is the word "plan". Is this an ESOP?