Investment Advisory Exempt from PBGC Coverage

[§#$%!]

The PBGC finally made a determination that the plan sponsor (Investment Advisor) is considered a professional service employer under 4021(c)(2)(A).  Further, the sole-owner is a professional individual under 4021(c)(2)(B).  It only took the PBGC three years to make the determination since our request.

[CuseFan]

What was the over/under? In all fairness to the PBGC, I'm sure the one person they have working on these is very busy.

Very frustrating I'm sure, like waiting for IRS on a VCP submission.

[david rigby]

Since you did not ask a question, I wonder if there is a prior discussion thread on this topic.  If so, perhaps you can link it.

[§#$%!]

I searched but couldn't find anything.

I thought their determination would only take a year after the ASPPA article in April 2017.  The PBGC was very methodical.  They were asking plenty of materials, including the corporate tax returns.  The PBGC letter even commented on the type of clients the advisor serviced, assets held under management, and credentials.

[Kac1214]

I think this goes back to Ilene Ferenczy's post on her site: https://ferenczylaw.com/flashpoint-surprise-you-are-or-are-not-a-professional-and-you-are-or-are-not-covered-by-the-pbgc/

She does a better job of explaining it that I would in trying to summarize there

[Draper55]

Perhaps they delayed due to  199A; they may have wanted to be on the same page as the IRS regarding a service professional.