dmb

Can a DB plan be amended to not provide further benefit accruals to a participants upon attainment of NRA (which is 65 in this case)? Thanks.

Does anyone know if a Model Annual Funding Notice that considers additional disclosures for MAP-21 is forthcoming?? Also, it looks like one of the additional disclosures is the minimum required contribution under MAP-21 and pre-MAP-21 provisions. For plans on MAP-21 does that mean that a pre-MAP-21 faux psuedo funding standard account will need to be kept from year to year for AFN purposes?? Thanks.

For 2012 calendar year plan year: Pre-MAP21 funding requirement = $40,000 MAP21 funding requirement = $0 Employer had previously elected to apply credit balance to satisfy quarterly contribution requirements. Since funding requriement is now $0 do those credit balance elections become moot, or does employer need to formally elect to reverse those elections in order to replenish the original credit balance? IRC 430(f)(3)(A) may apply credit balance against the minimum required contribution (not in excess of the minimum required contribution). Based on the above, it seems that any election in excess of the minumum required contribution is moot and therefore an election to reverse the application of credit balance would not be needed. Am I not understanding correctly? Thanks for any and all responses.

Calendar year plan, 2012 AFTAP was certified in March to 80.04%. There was a $23,000 deemed waiver of prefunding balance (there is no carryover balance) to get AFTAP to 80%, plus an additional voluntary wavier of $2,000 prefunding balance to account for the NHCE annuity purchases so the assets less prefunding would be 80% and allow employer to apply credit balance in 2013 if needed. This is not a huge issue since they still have a good amount of prefunding balance, but while it's my understanding the deemed waiver amount could be reversed if not necessary under MAP-21, can the addtional voluntary wavier be reversed as it was not done to avoid benefit restrictions?? Thanks.

Assuming that the allocation percentages are decellerating, do these intervals satisfy the smoothly increasing gateway for a service based allocation schedule: 0 to lessthan 8 years, 8 years to less than 12 years, 12 years to less than 16, 16 years to less than 20 years, 20 or more years. I don't work on these plans as much as i used to, my question is regarding the first group. I know 0 years of service doesnt' count, but does that first grouop have to be the same period as the others? Thanks.

Thanks for all the responses. AndyH nailed it, that's what i was looking for. Thanks again.

Eligibility for 401k salary deferrals and the 3% SH allocation is no service required. There is a one year service requirement for the new comparability allocation on top of the 3% SH. Forgetting about statutory elig requirements for now: Can the participants receiving the 3% SH allocation but not the base be consiered in rate group testing and if so must they then satisfy the gateway requirement which is 4.49% or might they be exempt from gateway since they're not eligible for the new comparability base allocation? Thanks.

We are trying to design a 401k w/ x-tested PS for Employer A, which is an LLC owned 60% by Employer B and 40% by Employer C. B and C are also LLCs. Employer B has three equal partners and Employer C has two equal partners. The 5 respective partners of Employers B and C each recieve K-1 income from their respective employers. None of them receive income directly from Employer A. Can the 5 partners be considered employees of Employer A and be included in it's 401k/PS plan based on their K-1 income from Employers B and C?? Thanks.

They can do that now under restructuring. When they become unrelated, then they "must" test employees of each employer separately. Good Luck! That's right, the transition period. Forgot about that. Thanks.

A controlled group situation will become a multiple employer situation. The plan is a cross-tested profit sharing plan. The question is can the employers be tested separately as if two distinct plans? Thanks.

Do you think the answer would be different if the plan is a 403b plan and not a 401a plan?? Thanks.

Calendar year PS plan has 2 allocation groups with the allocation %s written in the doc. Other than initial plan eligibility there is no criteria to receive an allocation of employer contribution. Employer is considering amending allocation schedule to add a third group for 2012. It is my understanding that since there is no last day rule or hours requirement for an allocation it is too late to amend for 2012 as all particpants have already accrued right to current allocation schedule. Can the employer consider the new allocation schedule for compensation earned from the adoption date of the amendment and the current allocation schedule for comp earned prior to the adoption date of the amendment?? Thanks.

Since there is no 2014 table yet, perhaps you are willing to share what answer you received from your software provider. Inquiring minds want to know. Teh information that was provided to me was not accurate, the software provider did not have the 2014 tables, we used the 2013 tables for the time being. Sorry.

Employer has a service based allocation schedule that satisfies the smoothly increasing gateway. A NHCE's allocation was made based on servcie without regard to a break in service so the participant recieved too much of an allocation. This is for a 2010 calendar year allocation. My questions are: when performing the avergage benefits test should the actual allocation be used or the correct allocation be used (the allocation has not yet been corrected)?? Also, does the incorrect allcoation impact the smoothly increasing status?? Thanks.

Employer maintains both a 401(a) profit sharing plan and 403(b) plan. When testing the 401(a) profit sharing plan for top heavy status, must the two plans be aggregated? Thanks.

I guess that's why i couldn't find it, but our software provider has loaded the 2014 tables. Guess i'll have to ask them where they got the tables. Thanks for the response.

Where can i find the 2014 PPA Mortality Tables?? Thanks.

Where exactly does the regulation not allow mid-year rates?? I didn't see any specific wording to that effect. Thanks.

There was a plan at that date. The form of the plan changed, but the accrued benefit still existed. The participant has an accrued benefit under the frozen multiple ER plan that he receives an RMD from, but should he also receive an RMD from the new single employer plan effective 1/1/10?

So even though there was no plan at 12/31/09, the fact that there was an accrued benefit on 1/1/10 (due to past service) would suggest teh RMD would apply. Thanks.

Multiple (not multi) employer calendar year DB plan freezes 12/31/08. One of the employers pulls out of multiple employer and starts their own calendar year plan effective 1/1/10. Benefit Formula allows for some past service. A participant who is 75 years old in 2010 would otherwise be required to take RMD by 12/31/10, but my question is would there be an RMD from this new plan since there was no plan and/or accrued benefit at 12/31/09?? Any cite would also be appreciated. Thank you.

Thanks for the info, and while i agree that the annual rates of the full yield curve should be used, i still don't see anything that specifically states that it is required rather than using the mid year rates of the full yield curve. It's a consistency thing. You have to use annual rates to determine the amortization amount initially. If the yield curve didn't change and you used mid-year rates to determine the present values, then the present value of past and future payments wouldn't equal the present value of the initial base, as it should. I guess that makes sense so if the mid year rates were used to value the liability and value the prior year charges that would be acceptable??

Thanks for the info, and while i agree that the annual rates of the full yield curve should be used, i still don't see anything that specifically states that it is required rather than using the mid year rates of the full yield curve.

If employer elects to use the Full Yield Curve (FYC) as the Interest Rate Basis for a plan year, how is the present value of prior years amortization amounts calculated? More to the point, the rates of the FYC are provided on the half year basis (every six months). Is it specified anywhere that the yearly rates should be used to PV the prior years amortization amounts or is it acceptable to use the half year rates (six month rate, 18 month rate, 30 month rate, etc.)?? Any cite reference would be appreciated. Thanks.

I thought I heard at ACOPA conferences that signing the SB is not considered to be a certification, and that a separate certification is required. Form over function, to me... Technically that may be true, but how would you complete and sign the Schedule SB without actual Funding Target, Credit Balance and Actuarial Value of Asset amounts?