GMK

1. Interest rates are discussed regularly here. Use the Search function. 2. Loan payback policy is up to the Plan Sponsor and, from previous discussions, I believe it has to provide some assurance that the payments will be made. Perhaps check with a banking expert on this. 3. To me, the availability of loans from a RETIREMENT plan that does not have banking expertise is like a roaring flame 3 feet high.

Many (too many?) DRO's take too many years to be filed. Just the way it is. No question that the Plan Sponsor (usually the employer) should have all the records. Call or write to them immediately. Of course, participants can keep their copies for future reference, but that boat has sailed. As Mike Preston points out, you may wish to contact a lawyer about modifying the DRO, especially if the records show less gain ... or maybe to reduce the amount to $35k as originally agreed to, since the divorce decree did not say $35k plus gains/losses. In 2009, it may have looked like there would only be losses, so that could be why gains/losses weren't included. And there may be an argument that the gains after the divorce aren't hers. But get legal advice on it.

a sad day in Benefitsville

Check the Distribution of Partially Vested Accounts and Restoration section in the Vesting article of the Plan Doc. A quick reading of ours seems to say that if the received or deemed distribution is less than 100% of the total account balance (which would include 0% vested Participants), then the 5 One-Year Breaks in Service clock starts ticking.

Thanks, J Simmons. I accept that. I had the wrong opinion of what "accrue" means. (For now, I don't know what it means.) So, send the DRO back for clarification about the earnings.

Really? If earnings do not accue, what do they do?

Maybe so, but Chaz is one of our Go-To people for welfare plans.

What Mr. Rigby said.

Not sure about this, but if you were under age 59-1/2 when you terminated employment at the bank, would later reaching age 59-1/2 count as another "trigger event" that allows a lump sum distribution of the remaining balance in the account?

Agreed. Agreed. And especially with Mr. Piquet's recommendation to mail to the company a WRITTEN claim for benefits and get the latest SPD. The SPD will contain, among other things, the Plan's procedures and timeline regarding claim denials. We wish you well.

Is there a regulation or pronouncement that says you can have different deferral schedules for flat amount deferrals vs. percentage deferrals? Just curious.

Happy New Year, and thanks for the wealth of knowledge and experience you all bring to these great message boards.

Answered here, I believe: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php/topic/59989-controlled-group/ edit: corrected link

At last, justification for non-bankers' offering loans from a RETIREMENT plan. As noted above, the employer or PA is probably shielded from fiduciary breach if the Plan's standard loan agreement is used and the standard terms and conditions apply (which could include payroll payments, as ESOP Guy mentioned). Otherwise, if non-standard documents are used, the employer or PA should probably be ready with a valid reason to justify why it approved special loan terms, in the event some authority person asks.

FWIW, having it spelled out in the Plan Doc would be best, but I would not have a problem calling this "extra vacation pay" earned on the day before termination, or something similar, if future terminating employees are offered the same deal, to avoid discrimination charges. The employer may also wish to look into how it affects other benefits. For example, if the DOT is out 2 weeks (with the employee not required to show up during those 2 weeks), is the employment extended into the next month, and is the employer then required under ACA to offer medical coverage for another month? and like that.

Good one, Austin. Wondering if that would make him Darth 401king? or does that Carrie (RIP) this joke too far far away?

Electronic delivery will be less of an issue as more people in my generation (ancients and pre-historics) retire. A majority in these groups are computer literate enough to check e-mails, etc., but a meaningful minority cannot or will not make using the computer a routine function in their work day.

Happy holidays or extended weekend or whatever you celebrate. Enjoy!

Follow Mr. Rigby's advice. Further, the Plan Administrator holds the reins, the tiller, whatever. The Plan Administrator decides if the DRO is qualified. If there is an ambiguity in the DRO or if a needed factor is not specified, the Plan Administrator can send a letter to all parties stating how the Plan will treat the ambiguous or missing parts, subject to the parties' agreeing to the points in the letter. Some will say that the Plan Administrator should not get involved and should simply reject the DRO as not being qualified, but sometimes the process moves along faster if the Plan says here's the problem and here's how we are going to do things if all of you agree. (And some of us PA's prefer not have DRO's hanging out there for an extended period of time.) If the parties do not agree on the points in the letter, then the parties can try again to generate a DRO that eliminates the ambiguities, so that DRO is qualified and fully instructs the Plan Administrator on how to do the division of the account (within the rules governing QDRO's). At that point, I'd leave it entirely up to them to work out the necessary details.

In keeping with the walked-into-a-bar discussion and the Siberian cold wave we have up here reminds me that: A pair of jumper cables walked into a bar. The bartender said, "OK, I'll serve you, but don't start anything."

To paste in a link, click the little switch in the upper left hand corner of the Reply box header to go into basically a text mode. Then you can paste stuff and like that. When done pasting, toggle the switch again to be in fancy editing mode (or whatever it's called).

My thoughts exactly. At least it doesn't apply the deferral rate changes retroactively. I'm guessing that it's all handled in one computer program, so they only have to input the deferral change and date, but still ...

Reminds one of the line: Q: How are the players on the _____________ (insert name of your favorite baseball team that keeps losing) like Michael Jackson? A: They wear one glove for no apparent reason.

Fans never die. Their teams just fade away in the post-season (or sooner). Next year we root for Cleveland, right? After that, here's the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_franchise_postseason_droughts

Sounds like the fact that they issued the the 3% safe harbor notice in November is not a factor in whether or not a different safe harbor notice can be issued now. Am I reading that correctly?