GMK

For example, http://www.taxresourcegroup.com/library/memo/1251.html

Here's a recent discussion of concerns about doing mid-year SH plan changes. It includes some references. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?/topic/53930-amendment-to-safe-harbor-plan/#.VBIHnOlOVaQ To avoid the year-end chaos (and possible issues with mid-year changes), have them do the amendment now with an effective date of January 1, 2015. The 3-1/2 months remaining until 2015 seems like enough time to prepare revised enrollment documents and SPD or SMM (and 2-1/2 months for the SH notice) for simply adding auto enrollment.

where "it" refers to the investment, not the oil. ( I know it's obvious, but I couldn't let a good straight line pass without comment .)

as a guess, maybe it's 'new, would-be entrants'

Check the plan doc for whether participants have an option to use the 5-year rule or life expectancy, or whether the plan doc specifies which applies to what circumstances. Check your files for a summer-like avatar. It'll be cold enough soon enough around here that we don't need reminding.

The surviving spouse gets special treatment. She can avoid RMD's until after she is 70-1/2. Non-spouse beneficiaries can roll the benefit, but only to an inherited IRA, so they get to keep taking RMD's. These charts are helpful (to me, anyway): http://www.mhco.com/BreakingNews/ABene_Chart1_110813.html http://www.mhco.com/BreakingNews/ABene_Chart2_110813.html

I found this related article interesting, although it's mainly for when the spouse is under age 59-1/2: http://www.theslottreport.com/2014/07/what-younger-spouse-should-do-when.html

If she rolls it over to her own account in the plan or to her own IRA, she will not have to take RMD's until her Required Beginning Date under the plan or IRA. As Lou S. said, she can roll it to an inherited IRA and will then have to take RMD's each year (after the year the owner died), based on her age on her birthday each year, using the Single Life Table. Also, if the owner did not take enough taxable distributions to satisfy his RMD for the year he died, the spouse will have to take a taxable distribution (before the rollover), to satisfy the owner's RMD for the year the owner died.

Here's a discussion from a few years back. Post 5 comments on selecting an order of priorities. http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?/topic/29626-what-should-we-do-if-an-employees-paycheck-isnt-big-enough-to-make-his-or-her-deferral-election/#.VAnij-lOVaQ So, the plan determines its priority list and communicates it to participants, possibly with a general handout, and at least whenever they elect or change their deferral rate.

My understanding is that if the trust is a "see-through" trust, then the persons who are beneficiaries of the trust are treated as designated beneficiaries of the plan. Otherwise, the participant is treated as having no designated beneficiaries, and the payment goes to the trust, which is responsible for the taxes. If the trust, and not a person, is the beneficiary, then the distribution is not eligible to be rolled over. The 20% withholding applies to rollover-eligible distributions. If the participant was at or over age 70-1/2 when she/he died, there's an RMD to the participant.

DAS - Check how much your share of the account went up. As of 5/9/2012, your portion was the account balance minus $96,869.62. After the transfer on 8/21/2014, how much was left in your account? Was it about 38% more than your 2012 portion? If not, then either your portion wasn't invested the same has hers, or the calculations should be checked.

I found this useful: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/epchd603.pdf see page 6-26.

The only way to know for sure is to ask the spouse's plan these questions.

One reason to have a non-calendar year health plan is to avoid the crowd that renews on January 1 and the associated delays in getting responses, etc., because everyone is asking about their renewals at that time.

Comment reserved, pending the results of the August 30 game in Houston.

^ apparently, certain benefits information web site heroes and other cool cats

Ah, a "smell similar to black licorice." I may have to buy me a can and try it out.

What if you already have a can of WD-40?

A pension plan cannot distribute a participant's benefits to an alternate payee without QDRO. There has to be QDRO. Before you pay for your own DRO, ask the CA pension people for a copy of the QDRO they have. Explain that you need it for OH. and what Lou S. said, although the ex-wife may not have to sign it. A judge has to sign the DRO, and the judge may want input from the ex-wife.

In addition, the person will have 60 days to accept COBRA coverage. That 60 days starts after when you send the notice or when coverage ends, whichever is later, so send the notice before coverage ends. COBRA for the child is like any other COBRA for one individual. Generally, coverage will end at the end of the month in which the child reaches age 26, but check to be certain when the coverage ends under the plan before you send the notice.

Thanks. That clears up most of it.

BG - probably don't have to amend the plan to name a new PA (depending on the wording in the plan document), but they may have to name a new person(s) in writing. As to whether a person is called the PA, the person who "runs" the plan is covered with tons of fiduciary responsibility by virtue of having the authority to make decisions about the funds, etc. They cannot rest easy simply because they are not identified as the PA. I remain interested in the 'who should be named PA' question. I can see that the Board might feel somewhat shielded by naming a person or a committee, instead of the plan sponsor, as PA. But the board members, including the outside directors, retain the fiduciary responsibilities for choosing competent, trustworthy PA personnel and for monitoring their performance. If someone decides to sue, I don't see that the company/directors can claim, "You can't sue us, because it was the PA that messed up." Maybe in practice, such an argument works. I'm just trying to understand the value in an effort to isolate board members from fiduciary responsibilities, compared to simply naming the plan sponsor as the PA.

I recall a discussion here about this, but my search skills were inadequate to find it. My understanding is that for moneys contributed before 1987, the participant can choose which taxable and non-taxable amounts are in which distributions. For post-1986 money, distributions are to be proportioned between the taxable and non-taxable amounts.

This may help: http://benefitslink.com/boards/index.php?/topic/47220-no-beneficiary-named-under-a-traditional-ira-but-the-spouse-is-the-sole-beneficiary-and-the-executor-of-the-estate/

If the court hasn't issued the divorce decree when the participant quits the job, I'd do the distribution to the participant (following the usual plan distribution rules). The couple can figure out another way to divide the assets when they do the divorce paperwork. As you note, this is probably the least expensive way to divide the participant's plan account, anyway. Spousal consent to the distribution would be required only to the extent that it would be required if there were no pending divorce. Until the plan receives the signed-by-the-judge DRO, the plan has no obligation to segregate the participant's account. If the plan knows the DRO is coming, the plan can decide to hold from distribution an amount that will cover the alternate payee's portion if the plan determines that the DRO is qualified. As Mr. Rigby notes, the QDRO procedures should outline what the plan does prior to and after receiving a DRO.