Guest SCUDDESLER Posted September 11, 2000 Posted September 11, 2000 Assume a pension plan satisfies the QJSA component of the QJSA/QPSA rules by providing the following benefit forms: (1) an annuity for the life of the participant with a survivor annuity for the life of his spouse which is 50% of the amount of the annuity payable during the joint lives of the participant and spouse (the "normal form of benefit"); (2) an annuity for the life of the participant with a survivor annuity for the life of his spouse which is 60% of the amount of the annuity payable during the joint lives of the participant and spouse; (3) an annuity for the life of the participant with a survivor annuity for the life of his spouse which is 70% of the amount of the annuity payable during the joint lives of the participant and spouse; and (4) a lump sum distribution which is actuarially equivalent to the normal form of benefit. As I read the final regulations under 411(d)(6) which were issued last week, the plan could be amended to eliminate, for example, all benefit options except (1) and not violate the Code's anticutback rule. Alternatively, the plan could be amended to eliminate (1), (2), and (4), without violating the anticutback rule. Is it true that any combination of optional benefit forms may now be eliminated so long as the plan retains one benefit form that satisfies the QJSA rule?
M R Bernardin Posted September 12, 2000 Posted September 12, 2000 Under the final regs, only defined contribution plans can eliminate optional forms of payment. I believe there is another provision in the regs, not affected by the new final regs, that allows plans to eliminate J&S annuities other than the greatest and least, but that may be limited to defined contribution plans as well.
david rigby Posted September 12, 2000 Posted September 12, 2000 That is correct. Here is a link to the reg, but I could not get it to ever connect. http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx...6cfr1v5_99.html See Reg. 1.411(d)-4 Q&A2(B)(2)(ii). 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.
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