fmsinc Posted Wednesday at 11:16 PM Posted Wednesday at 11:16 PM 29 CFR Section 2530.206(c) states that "(c) Timing. (1) Subject to paragraph (d)(1) of this section, a domestic relations order shall not fail to be treated as a qualified domestic relations order solely because of the time at which it is issued." We all know what this means or do we. It certainly means that a QDRO can be entered for the benefit of the Alternate Payee if the Participant had died before a QDRO is approved. But does it also mean that the estate of the Alternate Payee can obtain a QDRO if the Alternate Payee dies before a QDRO has been entered? We know this means that, with respect to defined benefit an defined contribution plans, a QDRO can be entered in favor of an Alternate Payee if the Participant has died before the QDRO was approved. But can the Alternate Payee's estate obtain a QDRO when it is the Alternate Payee that has died before the QDRO has been entered and you are dealing with a ERISA qualified defined contribution plan? Thanks, David
david rigby Posted yesterday at 12:11 AM Posted yesterday at 12:11 AM IMHO, yes. However, that does not automatically mean the resulting DRO will be qualified by the PA. Just an opinion. 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.
Peter Gulia Posted yesterday at 01:43 AM Posted yesterday at 01:43 AM DSG, for an analysis of some (not all) of the issues, read or re-read In re Marriage of Janet D. & Gene T. Shelstead, 66 Cal. App. 4th 893, 78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 365, 22 Empl. Benefits Cas. (BL) 1906 (Cal. Super. Ct. 1998). Interpreting ERISA § 206(d)(3) and applying § 206(d)(3)(K), the court reasoned that an order can be a QDRO only if it restricts its alternate payee—including a successor-in-interest to an original alternate payee—to a spouse, former spouse, child, or other dependent of the participant. While a California court’s opinion sets no precedent for any Federal court, some judges might adopt or adapt Shelstead’s reasoning. Some plans’ administrators might follow Shelstead’s, or even harsher, reasoning regarding a would-be alternate payee who died before the order one hopes is a QDRO is made. For an order directed to an individual-account (defined-contribution) retirement plan, a plan’s administrator might be less likely to deny QDRO treatment if the order, instead of providing for a payment to some named person other than the decedent, provides that a separate interest not paid or distributed before the alternate payee’s death is distributable to the alternate payee’s estate. This is not advice to anyone. Peter Gulia PC Fiduciary Guidance Counsel Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 215-732-1552 Peter@FiduciaryGuidanceCounsel.com
fmsinc Posted 16 hours ago Author Posted 16 hours ago Peter Gulia: Gulp. I have struggled with this issue for quite some time. See two Memos I have in my files. TRANSFERRING THE ALTERNATE PAYEE'S ERISA PENSION AND RETIREMENT.pdfBoggs and Terminable Interest Etc.pdf The variables are: (i) the PPA of 2006; (ii) defined benefit plan vs. defined contribution plan; (iii) Federal preemption of state law or agreement of the parties or Judgment of Divorce. I seem to be in the minority in thinking that Boggs doesn't mean what everybody else thinks it means. Thanks for your input. David Peter Gulia 1
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