dmb Posted April 20, 2010 Posted April 20, 2010 A client filed the 2009 PBGC Comprehensive Filing using the Alternative Method to calculate the Variable Rate Premium. Box 5 actually making the election was not checked. All the correct boxes were checked on page 2 and the form was filed on a timely basis. I know the PBGC is taking a hard line on this issue. I was just wondering if anyone has had any success in getting PBGC to allow the Alternative Method to be filed in this circumstance (or am i the only one with a client that did not check box 5?). Thanks.
Effen Posted April 20, 2010 Posted April 20, 2010 We had a few like that as well (where it wasn't our fault) and the PBGC did not let the client use the alternative. We had to refile the form and the client had to pay the higher premium. Once you check the box, you shouldn't check it in the future. 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.
AndyH Posted April 20, 2010 Posted April 20, 2010 A client filed the 2009 PBGC Comprehensive Filing using the Alternative Method to calculate the Variable Rate Premium. Box 5 actually making the election was not checked. All the correct boxes were checked on page 2 and the form was filed on a timely basis. I know the PBGC is taking a hard line on this issue. I was just wondering if anyone has had any success in getting PBGC to allow the Alternative Method to be filed in this circumstance (or am i the only one with a client that did not check box 5?). Thanks. There was a PBGC letter in today's newsletter on this subject. They are playing hardball. I am amazed that they can get away with this type of stuff still. Seems like the old days when the problem person would answer the problem resolution line.
dmb Posted April 21, 2010 Author Posted April 21, 2010 I saw the letter. Came off as very arrogant. while it may be "clear" that Box 5 needs to be checked to elect the Alternative FT, it can't be all that clear if so many didn't check it. In my case it was just a careless mistake. Just forgot to check box 5. Page 2 gave every indication the AFT was used and it was filed timely. Nice of them to offer to waive penalties while they make that back in additional premiums.
Kevin C Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 http://www.pbgc.gov/practitioners/law-regu...nt/tu17239.html This is in the Benefits in the News section today. It looks like the PBGC changed their mind.
AndyH Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 A form of this came out a couple of weeks ago. If you read the letters back and forth to Congress that were originally linked, you'll see that their minds were changed for them.
dmb Posted June 17, 2010 Author Posted June 17, 2010 A form of this came out a couple of weeks ago. If you read the letters back and forth to Congress that were originally linked, you'll see that their minds were changed for them. PBGC issued Technical Update 10-2 yesterday (maybe Tuesday) outlining procedures to apply for reinstatement of original filing if original filing was filed on timely basis and if line 7 was properly checked for APFT and the funding target was actually the APFT. See the what's new section on PBGC website.
AndyH Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Right, but the June 8 announcement, available here http://www.pbgc.gov/practitioners/whatsnew.html contains the original announcement and links to two letters that are very satisfying reading.
dmb Posted June 17, 2010 Author Posted June 17, 2010 I saw the letters, extremely satisfying, payback's a you know what!!
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