RCK

Andy t a, I do appreciate the sentiments, but you are violating the actuarial code by being optiimistic. Have you not taken the Pessimism exam yet? RCK, FSA, EA

Yup. That's the normal form from the top all the way to $1,000

We have acquired two separate DC plans that both have QJSA language, and for whom we have participants facing MRD requirements. For what its worth, one plan is a Money Purchase Pan and the other is a Profit Sharing plan that was created as an offset to a defined benefit plan. So my understanding is that if we have not gotten (cannot get) an affirmative election from the participant (and spousal consent if married), then we have to make the distribution as a life annuity or a QJSA. So the question is where we get an annuity vendor to provide a monthly annuity benefit where the premium or lump sum at distribution date is less than $2,000. Our search has trund up terminal funding annuity providers, but generally with a $10,000 mimimum payment. I guess in the interests of full disclosure I have to say that we deal with this issue on a daily basis, but we can get participant and /or spouse consent in that situation. Ideas?

The participant count on the most recent PBGC filing was 30,000+. We paid a big variable premium. All I can see as a red flag is that we asked for a refund because the plan "year" was only 10 months long, so we got to prorate.

Our plan is going through the PBGC Premium Compliance program. After a long delay, they announced that they want to make arrangements for an onsite visit. Has anyone been through this process, and if so what was the focus?

We have had inconsistent results using the USPS' NCOA service. We recently got a bunch of incorrect death confirms from NCOA. Hundreds of active employees were reported to us as deceased. We did have a big list to start with, but still enough to give us pause.

Thanks to everyone for their thoughts. We are taking the "D for the old Plan and C for the new Plan" approach.

Thanks for all the comments. Interestingly, I just got a SSA inquiry from a spouse. Participant termed in 1994 from Company A, and was reported on SSA for the ESOP plan as an Add. He was paid out in 1999. He was not reported as a D at any point. Later in 1999 we (Company B) acquired A, wound down the plan, paid out everyone we could find, and moved the few lost participants into an ongoing 401(k) plan. We did the final 5500, reporting it under the Company A plan name and EIN, but listing Company B as the sponsor. And the spouse gets the SSA notice with the Company A ESOP as the plan and Company B as the sponsor. So to Kim Sheek's question: I'm not sure that Social Security gets the Schedule H information, but they are able to pick up subsequent changes.

We have a difference of opinion in our office on the following: Participants have been reported on a Form SSA in the past as an Add because they terminated and did not take a distribution. They are still in that status when the plan is merged into another plan (and the other plan is the survivor). In the final 5500s, do you report them as a D on the merging plan and an A for the successor plan so that you are sure that the Social Security Administration tracks that right and (assuming they do not take a distribution). OR do you do nothing special for them in the merger relying on the Social Security Administration to pick up the merger/transfer data from the final Schedule H? Any thoughts?

Just to be sure, I'd go back and look at the purchase agreement to see what it says. One can hope--maybe it says that all activities in connection with the termination of the plan, including 5500 filings, belong to the sellers. We regularly to acquisitions and sales, and always try to address the issue. Of course, if it does not address the issue, it is your problem.

How many? Let's say 450. Our "core" plan has aobut 20,000 partiicpants. the plan in quesiton had about 1,000. But I get many times as many inquiries about the small plan than the core plan. And I get virtually no inquiries from all the other plans we've merged/termed.

My last post got no responses, so maybe this topic will prove more interesting. In 2002 we merged a plan for an acquisition into our "core" plan. Because there were numerous employee terminations, and we were more aggressive in making distributions, we paid out quite a few people. And we reported them appropriately on the SSA--either as Adds or as Deletes. The Problem: it is clear to me that people we reported as deletes on the 2002 SSA accompanying the final 5500 never reached the Social Security Administration. They are on the 2002 SSA as Deletes, but every week a few call me looking for "the benefits that Social Security told them they had". Showing them as Deletes on the successor plan isn't going to help. Other ideas?

This seems like this should be an easy question, but I can't find a reference, and did not find anything on my search here. We file a 5500 in a timely manner and distribute the SAR in a timely manner. Later we find an error that requires filing an amended return, due to a change in the net assets on Schedule H. Do we have to distribute a new SAR? Do we get to apply some level of materiality check? Thanks for any help

If you can dig up that old joke, I can dig up my response from New Year's eve 2002/3: Tom, You are confused--this punchline actually belongs to a similar joke about a communist TV weatherman. Concept is the same, and that version is shorter but, alas, no funnier than yours. Happy New Year. RCK

Wow. I'm off this site for a month or so and somehow the Humor board got changed into a Fantasy Land board.

Our provider (high profile, big plans) uses essentially the XIRR calculation in EXCEL, and includes links to pages and pages of description on how the calculation is done and what it means.

jevd is correct--the disclsimer had to be done within 9 months. So, jevd, what it the solution?

I agree. Rereading the initial post, it seems like the beneficiaries are not lost--they won't take the money. If that's the case, they have to either disclaim the benefit in writing or you cut them a check. And if they disclaim it, you move to the next step in your plan's sequence (for our plans its the participants spouse, then children, then parents, then siblings, then estate.

Does the plan allow deferrals of 75% of pay (or given that some came in at 6% of pay) doe it allow deferral of 80 or more % of pay? to J4FKBC: I'm hoping that the excess contributions were made by the owners' wives as opposed to the owner's wives.

Just so the Sox nation knows, the rest of the world has come to the conclusion that there two Yankee teams--one in New York and one in Boston. There used to be a distinction, but not any longer.

Dave, Where did you get the round tuits? I am completely out, and have a whole desk full of projects for when I get a round tuit.

Note to LondonBroil: In the old (really old) days you could probably assume that a mutual fund offered by a plan where Fidelity was the recordkeeper was a Fidelity fund. But current practice revolves around "open architecture" and Fidelity and other recordkeepers will handle funds from a wide variety of fund families. As mentioned above, a key factor in your decision will be the expenses that you are actually paying, and that must be determined within your plan. Since expenses are a hot topic right now, you should be able to dig those out somewhere.

I am so embarassed that I did not think it through. Just goes to prove that you do get what you pay for.

I'm not sure why it matters. If they pass separately, won't they automatically pass together? Intuitively, seems like basic arithmetic.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Based on the fact pattern below, I am sure that the SSA we filed with the final filing for a terminated plan was not plugged into the SSA system. How do I go about fixing that? BACKGROUND: I work for a pretty big controlled group that has grown primarily by acquisition. So I've terminated or merged a bunch (over 40) of plans covering lots of employees. And we hardly ever get inquiries from participants who were paid out but have gotten a SSA-L99 saying that they might be entitled to a benefit. But over the last couple of months I have gotten six or eight inquiries from people we paid out and reported on the 2001 filing as D--previously reported, but no longer entitled to a benefit. Should I: Resubmit the original filing? Submit an amended filing, reporting them again on the current format? Try to call my way to an official answer? I've already been throguh the IRS, EBSA and SSA websites without any progress. Thanks for any advice.