Buzz

You may want to try to contact a professional search firm like PBI and see if they can provide you with some potential matches.

While there is some uncertainty on whether or not there might be some impact on NQDC plans if and when the tax bill is finalized, am I correct that the original proposal would have applied to installment NQDC plans and not just excess deferral plans? In other words, if a NQDC is designed to start paying annual installments of $200,000 for 5 years at the later of age 65 or the date the individual retires and the individual leaves as of 12/31/2020, she would merely pay FICA/Medicare in 2020 and ordinary income from 2021 through 2025 as under current law. However, if she left 1/1/2026, would the full present value would be subject to ordinary income as well as the FICA/Medicare tax in 2026?

For purposes of purchasing an annuity under a plan termination that meets the "safest annuity provider" conditions, what is the experience on the commission percentage or flat fee that brokers charge for a small population? For example, for a plan with a liability of less than $1 million, what type of charge could the plan expect? If the liability is between $1 million and $5 million, would the rate be the same? I have seen 6% commission in the past but have not processed one through a broker for a while. Thanks!

Absent formal guidance of course, Are we in agreement that if the plan document includes the exception "... equals or exceeds 110% of the value of current liabilities, as defined in Code Section 412(l)(7)", the calculation should only be done using such methodology? If the languaged stopped at "current liabilities", would it be open to interpretation of how we define current liabilities? Or should the plan be amended to specifically use Funding Target if we do not want to be stuck with using 412(l)(7)? I realize that part of the regulations state that the method has to be reasonable and consistent. Thanks much!