Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I figured this question would have been asked here before, but I couldn't find it so here goes. Do you think Rev. Rul. 79-237 still applies in this post-PPA environment and NC and amortization payments are pro rated through the plan termination date?

"What's in the big salad?"

"Big lettuce, big carrots, tomatoes like volleyballs."

Posted

If 79-237 applies, I will lobby Mo. Senator Kit Bond. It's unfair (I voted for Obama) that 79-237 would still apply whereas 77-2 no longer applies. Or does it? Assuming that the plan will be made sufficient to make full distributions at termination, this is a matter of academics, that is unless your client is being prosecuted for Medicare fraud, in which case you'd better get it right, whatever right is.

May I suggest for your next caveat: "You can't practice billards on a ping-pong table and then expect life to behave rationally." (andy t. a.)

The material provided and the opinions expressed in this post are for general informational purposes only and should not be used or relied upon as the basis for any action or inaction. You should obtain appropriate tax, legal, or other professional advice.

Posted

I don't think you would "prorate" the TNC. I think it would be based on whatever actually accrued from the BOY to DOPT or freeze. I'm less sure about the shortfall amortization - prorating makes sense, which it why it probably isn't right.

The material provided and the opinions expressed in this post are for general informational purposes only and should not be used or relied upon as the basis for any action or inaction. You should obtain appropriate tax, legal, or other professional advice.

Posted

Personally, I don't think 79-237 made much sense in the first place. Why pro rate the NC in the year of term? If the benefit was accrued, why not fund for it? That being said, I don't see how PPA changed 79-237 and I don't know that anyone really does.

"What's in the big salad?"

"Big lettuce, big carrots, tomatoes like volleyballs."

Posted

And to expand upon that conversation - the purpose of the pro-ration was due to the termination creating a short plan year. After further discussion with others I came to the conclusion that termination no longer creates a short plan year therefore there is no pro-ration.

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use