Guest merlin Posted July 12, 2005 Posted July 12, 2005 Client wants to purchase an annuity to provide the payment. Would this be considered to be a payment "on behalf of the restricted employee" and therefore not allowed?
Guest merlin Posted July 12, 2005 Posted July 12, 2005 Just to fill in the blanks, plan is underfunded and would not meet any of the exceptions.
Blinky the 3-eyed Fish Posted July 12, 2005 Posted July 12, 2005 Logically, that would not be permissible since the value of the plan would be depleted by the lump sum amount needed to purchase the annuity. That would defeat the whole point of keeping plan assets around in case the plan terminates with not enough assets. I am sure if you read the applicable cites like 1.401(a)(4)-5(b) and Rev. Rul. 92-76 that will confirm what I am saying. "What's in the big salad?" "Big lettuce, big carrots, tomatoes like volleyballs."
Guest merlin Posted July 12, 2005 Posted July 12, 2005 That's what I thought, and why I referred to the "on behalf of" wording. Thanks for the confirmation.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now