AndyH

The client or the agent? (Back to the future again).

Very sorry to hear this. Mike was a really important resource and contributor for a long time and could always be counted on to keep wayward commenters on their toes and in check! But he’d apologize for his sometimes abrupt “online personality” in person. They didn’t make two of him! He will be missed.

I always cautioned that such an arrangement was potentially a PT - as an indirect loan.

But for the right price......😁

Agree on all points. But cost is probably #1. BTW, COLA provisions used to be very common for very small, tax driven DB plans specifically because they were a technique to increase deductions. This was before changes to IRC 415 rules (I want to say mid 80's) were changed to limit the maximum benefit payable as a lump sum to the actuarial equivalent of a life annuity, calculated without any COLA provision.

Thanks for the suggestion Peter. I was going to call DOL and follow your suggestion tomorrow but got resolution late today. Senior management heads need to roll there; the people answering the phones were fine and the supervisors are stressed; gotta feel bad for them. I bet there are at least hundreds of other people, maybe many more, in similar situations.

Now on week 5 (since valid authorization forms were sent to Nationwide). Based on the experience that I (and apparently many, many others) have had, I think Nationwide's retirement plan services should be shut down, and I don't say that lightly.

Yes, being very very very kind.

Well the situation that you describe is clearly an error on the part of whoever set up and/or approved the contract. Nothing was "just fine" IMO. In the original post, the error is clearly on the part of whoever wrote the document.

Yeah, but somebody's got to sign the SB. I wouldn't do that without legal guidance. Unless it gets reversed and redeposited - maybe that's the answer.

Never heard of such a thing. Time for ERISA counsel.

What is a reasonable to await processing of a rollover request (ACH) by an insurance company, in this case Nationwide? Paperwork, all in order, submitted to Nationwide 3+ weeks ago and nothing but crickets. My former employer says Nationwide is having issues from a January system conversion and rollovers are taking weeks. I've never been on this side of such an issue. Is waiting weeks normal? What if the market had tanked?

Congratulations and Best Wishes!

Haha I know you can handle it! Not sure if I told you, but it took me a while to figure out who "Bri" was and that he (not she as I thought) actually worked with me. But I was always impressed with your comments lol. You're one of the current and future Benefitslink stars! That's good because lots of the old ones are gone or getting quiet these days. But not all of them.....

Thanks Tom you've been very much missed here! I hope you are enjoying your retirement. Not sure if you ever increased your church going (probably) and bread baking (probably not) like you said you were going to, but I do know we don't have any new pension songs from you, so time to get back in the studio😁

Thanks to the guy that always claims to have minimal DB knowledge but who's comments I almost always (if not always) agree with! And thanks for all the humor and entertaining comments over the years!

The end of December marked the end (at least for now) of my 41+ years in this business, starting as a part time DC system programmer (before I knew what a "forfeiture" was) and ending as an Enrolled Actuary with all the ASPPA exams completed as well. I have also been a Benefitslink Board participant for more than 23 years. Here, as well as through the exams, is where I learned my stuff. I am grateful for the learning, teaching and helping opportunities (and more than a little fun) created by Dave and Lois Baker through this awesome system. Their efforts aren't appreciated enough. Thanks also to the countless Board participants that have educated and helped me over the years; and I hope I've been able able to help others as well. I still plan to linger now and then but goodbye and Happy New Year for now! Thanks again Dave and Lois.

Agree

The benefit would be frozen at the 415 limit at the time of termination. I think there is an exception which rarely (if ever) applies to small plans that allows increases as part of a general COLA provision for retirees. I'd have to research it to double check, but I believe that may be possible. But from what you describe, it is almost certainly frozen at the limit in effect at termination of employment.

Yes

There's a conservative position and an aggressive position IMO. The Plan Administrator should decide.

My understanding is the same as Belgarath's (as usual). Why can't you bring in an "excluded" person via an 11-g amendment? Participant A gets an allocation of $x.

Great link Lou! Imagine that - 18 years ago. Some really knowledgeable people on that thread. Some are gone and some remain (to quote John Lennon).

My understanding from IRS conference speakers in the past is yes, retro to 1/1 is ok even if the entity did not exist on 1/1.

Ned Ryerson thinks this is a great idea. If only he were still on the Boards.....