AndyH

Thanks. I have seen references to deferred tax liabilities which to the non-GAAP mind looked like mirrors. Any GAAP minded people out there willing to explain what that means and why? Is it an internal accrual issue or does it have tax implications?

It does not appear that such cosmic phenomenon are prevalent in the known universe at this star date. Perhaps beyond the Great Barrier one must venture.

Would you or someone else kindly explain what such accounting attributes might be? I have seen some COLI FAS #87 exhibits for example, and have not seen any differences that appeared sustantive beyond what looked like smoke and mirrors.

Members of the psychic friends network (and some insiders no doubt) had a useful option.

Incorrect. (I think) Why y'all hung up being friended? It doesn't affect his ability to view your profile. In fact, I don't see that it has any function at all relative to these Boards, does it? He friended me also, but I don't care.

If your component groups are chosen at will without any "reasonable classification", then each component must have a ratio percentage of 70% or more because the NCT is not satisfied and therefore the Average Benefits Test is not available.

And unrelated business income tax.

But if, hypothetically the contract does earn 8%, is there any reason to do this other than: 1. Earn (8%-expenses and insurance premiums) tax deferred from now until payment date inside the contract versus earn less 2. Earn (8% less taxes) in an after tax account (assuming the same investment mix). The same deductible amount is paid at retirement age, right? And, at the same tax rate. Is there anything else to this?

Thanks for the comments. Insurance premiums, policy commissions and expenses eating at the return are my reasons. I'm looking at a proposal that assumes 8% growth. Is that even legal now to illustrate? Is it reasonable?

Can anyone explain the advantages to a Bank or Bank Executive of Bank Owned Life Insurance in a NQ plan for the executive? Other than deferral of taxation on growth of a life insurance policy (which I am admittedly skeptical about), are there any other legitimate selling points? Are there any advantages due to the banking industry's tax or capitalization rules? Any contrary arguments?

I don't think it needs to be a uniform percentage. It could certainly be a flat dollar amount or different amounts or different percentages. You could also define it more efficiently as "the amount needed to elevate each (of the three) participant into a passing rate group" or something like that. I'd prefer that it be spelled out but we've done many as described.

You sir, appear to have violated the take-oneself-too-seriously clause of our constitution reproduced below. My comment was intended as lighthearted; shirley, many understood it's origin. You sir did not get the joke. "Sometimes a reply appears to be irrelevant to the orginal topic. We all benefit by avoiding "clutter", but sometimes there is another purpose: - Just because a reply is "lighthearted" does not mean it is irrelevant; - You are not required to respond to every reply; - Some replies really are intended as jokes; although they may be distracting to the message, sometimes they can be useful to keep us from taking ourselves too seriously;"

Incorrect.

True, but why is this legal? Does it make any rational sense for a non-profit? It makes the "If I were King for a day" list for me.

So, how long until VEBAPLAN writes his favorite word? He must be busy filming another video. Probably about balloon rides and the aftereffects.

This scenario is wrong on many levels. Besides the PT, how old are these people and what is going to happen when the time comes that the plan should be terminated? To make things more fun, have them rent it out to a relative when Hubby is out of town and have another PT and pay unrelated business income tax.

Thanks for the comments.

Unpaid invoices should be identified first (not necessarily paid first). Then discuss ongoing services. Sure, they might be combined in a more inclusive engagement, but at least you will have addressed them. But why would the PBGC care about unpaid bills of defunct plan sponsor? If I were them I'd say "not our problem".

Existing client with underfunded plan goes bankrupt. Multiple Form 10s filed. PBGC inquires several times, but has bigger fish to fry. Bankruptcy attorney's ERISA attorney tells us he expects the PBGC to take over the plan soon. Remnants of current "client" does not even have a list of participants, nor does bankruptcy attorney. I am anticipating a lot of work that will be required of us, some "actuarial" perhaps and much "administrative". Plus some existing bills are unpaid (secondary question).

WOW! I'm going to read that one, it is a lot shorter than the one I printed Maybe that "fit to one page" button would be even better. Then just get a fancy microscope and you're all set.

Thanks. What do you mean by "deal with those separately"? Yes, that is another issue.

Anyone willing to describe the process from the perspective of the plan's actuary of a takeover of a 150 life DB plan who's sponsor went belly up and closed it's doors and boxed and stored what records it had, leaving the actuary/TPA as the only source of any reasonable records of benefit entitlements? What is the actuary's responsibility? Can it get paid for it's time assisting the PBGC in compiling records?

How about a few PBGC Form 10 filings? Some 10/15 quarterly contribution followups and elections? Read a few hundred pages of final regs?

This looks like fun, like the old days (the 412(i) guys are always fun). Blinky, don't you know who you are dealing with? Don't you know who he knows? He is after all "the nations leading expert on pensions" (among many other things)