Hojo

Actuarial Outpost will have actuarial listings for retirement plans. Any small businesses would also have needs for other retirement plan administrators.

There's no plan yet so i guess that means we can use whatever definition we want.....? It just seems so shady.

I hate to bring this back from the dead, but every time I search the answers seem to be getting older and older...... That being said, I have this exact same situation, and LLC 50/50 partnership with one employee. The employee gets a normal W2, the two partners get a W2 for $30,000 and also get a K1. i know it's still not really legal, but what do you do in terms of calculating compensation for the plan(s) [potentially setting up a CB and profit sharing plan]?

There are actually very quick page tabs and excellent search features in most pdf readers. I find it much faster to quick search Section 6.1 to get to that page then flipping through a paper document. Additionally, i can find all references to a specific section as needed or flag the page I'm reading to come back to it. A hyperlinked document would be fantastic, but is far from necessary to do what you're looking to do here.

I know people have said this already, but you can create checkmark stamps in adobe and other programs to check you work as you review on screen. It's actually very simple. Instead of printing it out, print it to pdf and then add your checks and comments and then pass on. This way, all of you checks are saved and noted before anything moves on.

If the materials are from Dave Farber or Rick G. they will give you more than enough info. Also, they are both frequent contributors to the actuarial outpost and are always available for questions.

I think we're making this way too complicated.... If the participant is still active, his normal form is now a single life annuity and is calculated as such. If the participant is retired, then it depends on the form of benefit that he selected.

No, this means that if you file an SB with MAP-21 rates for 2013, then that counts as your election and you don't have to do s***! So business as usual for 2013, use HATFA for 2014. Done.

Here's the link I posted in the other thread..... http://www.irs.gov/p...rop/n-14-53.pdf

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-14-53.pdf

My guess would actually be 10/15 (the filing deadline of the 5500). Reason being that we often have clients make contributions prior to having final census data (knowing that it would fall under within the min/max corridor whether they made $0 or $260k). I always figure that nothing is final (assumptions or otherwise) until the filing is received.

Has anyone heard anything new on this? It seems like a black hole right now. Any sample documenets to opt out for 2013?

Of course it COULD be underfunded. I was just saying that based on the OP's statement that it was probably well overfunded and no minimum was going to apply. Didn't want to make it more difficult than it needed to be.

My guess (and it's only a guess) is that the plan is already frozen so no normal cost and the plan is obviously overfunded on a funding basis so you know that there will be excess assets for valuation purposes (even if they are not overfunded when it comes to paying out lump sums) thus no minimum funding. I have many clients in this situation.

What I've always done in this situation is count the participants benefitting for PBGC purposes, but all participants for 5500 and Schedule SB purposes. This seems to be in line with what your prior actuary did and what Andy said.

When were the Age 55 and Age 56 benefits calculated? Meaning, did someone do the Age 55 benefit calculation in 2010 and is doing the Age 56 calculation in 2013? If so, then yes, the offsets would be different and the two benefits are not entirley comparable because they are payable at different times.

You're thinking too much. The 33 1/3 is the limit for the test, not the limit on the actual accrual.

I've had two.

The contribution credits are a flat dollar so they're known for the 2013 plan year already. The interest crediting rate is also known. So basically I'm trying to verify that when I roll this plan to 1/1/2014 the beginning balances are correct as of 1/1/2014 and how to get that done. Right now, it appears that the only way is to roll the valuation and then manually update the balances for each individual. I'm hoping that I'm wrong and that there is something I should be doing in the 2013 plan year, but no one seems to know.

My 12/31/2012 and 1/1/2013 CB values are the same, but if I add contribution credits and interest credits as I normally would for the year (as a transaction type), then it calculates the funding target on the 12/31/2013 value instead of the 1/1/2013 value. If I don't put them in the transactions, but put the contribution credit in the allocation and the interest credit in the interest & mortality, it calculates the FT and TNC correctly, but doesn't rollforward my account balances for the next year correctly and I have to hand input them next year...... So what am i missing?

Does anyone have a problem running beginning of year valuations for Cash Balance Plans? My funding target keeps getting based on my end of year account balance as a starting value instead of my BOY value......thoughts on how to correctly calculate this?

Sorry if this is simple, but it's Friday and my brain has stopped working..... Suppose the following 1/1/2013 Valuation Date. Hypothetical Account Balance as of 1/1/2013 = $5,000 IC = 4% Pay Credit = 3% If I'm doing the valuation during 2013 and I don't yet know the 2013 pay, how do I determine the Target NC? Do I look at last years pay and estimate the accrual of the pay credit plus the interest credit to get the accrual for the year? I'm almost certain that's it (unless I have a salary scale in which case I would apply that for one year), but just need to check since I'm doubting myself.

Has anyone had any recent experience with this? We have a plan with 10 participants who are $0 benefitting and 20 with >$0 benefitting, but want to be covered by the PBGC.

scarabrad - Read up on 415 limits and how they work and how they have been indexed historically......then come back and ask your question (if you still have it because you probably won't). Ninja'd by Andy!

I think they can get an email from the spouse saying that he has read the languange and consents to waive the QJSA so they are going to go ahead with that. They aren't overly concerned with problems specifically since the participant is actually the daughter of the owner of the company. They expect to have a copy of the POA, the email, and a hold harmless agreement as documentation to pay out the benefit and then have him sign a waiver as documentation when he returns.