Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Was given a last minute document to do and racing a little. I haven't had to prepare the docs before and have a question about the NRA. Their current doc had a retirement age of 58 and 10 on part but no later than 65 and 5 on part. Question is, how do I accomodate that first piece. I don't believe that is allowable any longer is it?

Posted

58/10 is still allowable so long as you can support it reasonably representing the norm for the plan sponsor's industry. How to demonstrate this? Generally, good luck.

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

problem is, I"m coding the doc and 58 and 10 isn't an option. It warns me that it shouldn't be less than 62. Using an FT william Doc, How would I code the doc. I can add a custom sectio nthat won't throw it off their prototype. They, meaning FT Williams support, suggest putting an early retiement in.

Posted
Will the actuary be satisfied with that solution?

Including this actuary's spouse, no one has ever voiced concern over an actuary's satisfaction.

If it fits the prototype, you could have NRA = 65 (or even 62) as a safe-harbor and then have unreduced e.r. at 58/10. This stuff was covered in IRS Notices 2007-8 and 2007-69.

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
Including this actuary's spouse, no one has ever voiced concern over an actuary's satisfaction.

Funny.

When an issue comes up, e.g. the Final NRA Regs interim amendment, the Final 436 Regs interim amendment, or even some individual plan amendmens, we prefer to discuss the issue with the actuary before writing the amendment. Other amendments, such as a plan freeze amendment, would certainly not need such discussion, although the actuary would have already been involved with answwering any impact questions re: funding, effect on financials, etc. If the amendment increases benefits, confirmation of the funded status takes place (if not already determined). FWIW.

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