Guest Richard Scheer Posted August 14, 2001 Posted August 14, 2001 Is it legal for a DB Plan to have different forms of benefit based on years of service? For example, if a participant has less than 15 years of service his benefit is based on a Straight Life Annuity, but if a participant has 15 or more years, his benefit is based on a 10 Year Certain and Life Annuity.
david rigby Posted August 14, 2001 Posted August 14, 2001 Hmmm. Never thought about that before. It clearly blows any possibility of safe-harbor. Probably would have to be tested under the benefits, rights and features portion of the non-discrimination regs. I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.
Guest Richard Scheer Posted August 15, 2001 Posted August 15, 2001 For what its worth, this is a multiemployer collective bargained plan so any discrimination issues will pass automatically
david rigby Posted August 16, 2001 Posted August 16, 2001 In general, (to oversimplify) the reason that you can or cannot do something in a qualified plan is whether it might violate one of the numerous "non-discrimination" portions of the statutes, such as 415, 401(a)(4), etc. If none of those are "at risk", then you should be able to design whatever plan you want. After all, the non-discrmination issues do not address discriminating among the NHCE group. I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.
RCK Posted August 16, 2001 Posted August 16, 2001 I agree with pax. Based on the facts, this would not be a discrimination issue. It certainly could become a communications, actuarial valuation, or HR issue. And, no, I am not changing my user name from RCK to "I agree with pax."
david rigby Posted August 16, 2001 Posted August 16, 2001 OUCH! I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.