RPA assumptions

[FAPInJax]

I just had a client fax me a page from what appears to be the DB Answer Book.

QA 28:19 states that for plan years beginning after 1/1/2003 that GAR 1994 is REQUIRED for RPA calculations. This is per Revenue Ruling 2001-62.

I do not believe this is true based on my reading but am interested in other's opinions. I thought the ruling applied to lump sums for 415 purposes. We are still using the GAM 83 sex distinct tables (pending IRS issuance of regulations)

[Effen]

I'm with you. 83gam sex distinct for RPA CL & PBGC premiums. 94 GAR for lump sums and 415 limits.

[Guest dsyrett]

I agree.

[AndyH]

I am looking at the online version and it says that 1983 GAM (sex distinct) must be used. It does not say anything different about the mortality table for 2004.

So it looks like this has been corrected.

[Gary]

I agree with the responses.

However, for my clarification, what is the difference btween the mortality table in rev rul 95-6 and rev rul 95-28?

Presumably 95-28 is for RPA calculations.

[mwyatt]

95-28 is sex distinct (83 GAM and 83 GAF) used for CL. 95-6 is blended 83 GAM used for minimum lump sums (until 94 GAR replaced the table).

[FAPInJax]

Thanks for all the responses. Always good to realize I am not totally in the dark - now where is that light switch <G>