mctoe

Does anyone know if a plan sponsor is required to offer this new loan feature. I believe the $100,000 coronavirus-related distribution is optional for plan sponsors. Thank you.

Why doesn't the participant get to know who gets what? As a participant, I would want to know what the 85 bps is being used for. In your example, if the investment advisor for the plan is getting 25 bps some may consider that unreasonable.

Thank you for the responses. It is a $350M plan.

The more I look into this plan the more issues I find. I have limited knowledge of creating/maintaining retirement plans but do understand the principles of low cost/fee investing. The fund I mentioned in the original post is a Collective Investment Trust and as far as I can tell the excess fees are used for administrative expenses of the plan. The plan fund line up also includes A class shares which of course does not make sense. A more significant issue with this specific plan is the non-disclosure of certain "expenses" of the plan. The administrative expenses of the plan are documented and disclosed to participants, but there is another bucket of money being paid to "consultants". The funds used to pay the consultants are not disclosed. This is my understanding how this plan works: plan assets are transferred to the investment fund manager, an agreed upon revenue sharing amount is transferred to the revenue account, the revenue account then reimburses the plan for administrative expenses, and finally other funds in the revenue account are used to pay the consultants. The plan does not disclose the funds paid to the consultants. Is this common practice or highly unusual?

Ok thank you Bird.

Reviewing the fund lineup of a retirement plan. One of the funds is a CIT with an expense ratio of 25 bps. 100% of the CIT is invested in a single Vanguard Fund with an expense ratio of 8 bps. Why would someone create a CIT to only hold one mutual fund and then increase the fees of the fund?

With the work I do with gov't DB & DC plans it appears to me that these plans have no fear of being subject to a "real" audit. Also from my experience, the people (plan sponsor/administrator) overseeing these plans know full well they are not in compliance with various IRS regulations but don't seem to care because they are not going to get caught. Just my two cents.

Thank you Peter. I am a little embarrassed now that I asked this question. Guess what was in my bookcase? Yes, the Governmental Plans Answer Book! Going through Chapters 7-9 now, thank you.

What agency has oversight over Governmental DC plans? Are Governmental DC plans ever audited? If yes, by who?

The plan uses a 7% discount rate and an old mortality table-GAM 83. The pension valuation company used a 2.85% discount rate and RP 2000.

Divorcing individual has a defined benefit plan (government) and a pension valuation was prepared by a company. The pension valuation company used "customary" factors in performing the calculation. The PV of the pension prepared by the company was $2.1 mil. The pension plan calculates the PV of the pension at $1.3 mil. Clearly, a large discrepancy. Does anyone know if an argument could be made to use the lower value since that is how it is valued by the plan?

Thank you Effen, very helpful.

Thank you for the response. I have tried to find out what mortality table was used with no success. The discount rate used was 5.30% Not sure what you mean by ancillary benefits Yes, the ages are correct. Police defined benefit plan that provides a benefit after 20 years of service.

My apologies if this is a dumb question from a non-actuary. Is there a way to figure out what mortality table was used in determining PV of governmental defined pension plan? I have the following info: Age at cut-off = 41.86 Pension start age: 45.66 Accrued annual pension benefit at cut-off age = $40,639.32 PV of $1 pension = $12.2619 PV pension = $498,315 Thank you.

Ok, thank you!