Young Curmudgeon Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 I'm looking at a one-man DB plan where the participant will go into pay status at age 70.5 for RMD purposes. Based on the lump sum and payments, the plan will deplete all assets when the participant reaches age 83. The plan uses the GAR94 proj. to 2002 table. My question is whether we can decrease the minimum distribution by changing to a "longer life expectancy" table, or is this really being driven by the table for the 417(e)? It seems odd that a DB would only fund to pay until age 83 when life expectancy on the DC side is so much longer.
david rigby Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 It seems odd that a DB would only fund to pay until age 83 when life expectancy on the DC side is so much longer. Huh? Is the plan fully funded? If so, it seems unlikely that assets will be exhausted at age 83. Are you anticiapting a zero investment return? I'm a retirement actuary. Nothing about my comments is intended or should be construed as investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Occasionally, but not all the time, it might be reasonable to interpret my comments as actuarial or consulting advice.
Lou S. Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 Correct me if I'm wrong but don't DB plans have to start paying the annuity benefit to statisfy the RMD rules?
AndyH Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 "The plan uses the GAR94 proj. to 2002 table." For what? ditto Huh
Andy the Actuary Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 Check MRD provision in plan document for guidance. 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.
Young Curmudgeon Posted September 20, 2013 Author Posted September 20, 2013 Here's some more detai: The table is from the actuarial equalent section of the document, 5.5% interest rate pre/post, 1994 GAR Projected to 2002. I have a lump sum of $1,577,526 on a monthly accrued benefit of $13,252. It's fully funded. If you draw $13,252 each month from a lump sum earning 5.5%, you exhaust the funds when you're 83. My question is whether we can change to a different table and subsequently lower the required payment by increasing the life expectancy. Possible?
AndyH Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 Unless I'm missing something, Lou is right and AtA's suggestion would confirm that.
Effen Posted September 21, 2013 Posted September 21, 2013 The "lump sum" is simply the present value of the monthly annuity at a specific point in time. The $1.5 M is simply the "value" of the annuity today. The plan has the obligation to pay the $13,525 monthly annuity for the lifetime of the participant. The value of the annuity will fluctuate based on interest rates and life expectancy. If he lives until 83, the annuity will still have significant value. However, if he dies, the annuity will have no value. If the participant is not making contributions into the plan, there is probably no real reason to continue it. It may be best to terminate the plan, roll the money to an IRA, and take the MRD's using the IRA rules. 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.
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