I'm trying to find the table of rates that reflect the salary increase table S-5 that supposedly is in the Actuary's Pension Handbook.

[Advert.]

CertiDeath™ eliminates the work, complexity, and uncertainty now associated with identifying deaths, saving companies loads of time spent reviewing obituaries and money lost due to missed or misclassified deaths.

Under ERISA and the tax Code, a retirement plan may allow an alternate payee's QDRO distribution before the participant's earliest retirement age. ERISA � 206(d)(3)(E)(ii); IRC � 414(p)(4)(A)-(B); 26 C.F.R. � 1.401(a)-13(g)(3). For individual-account (defined-contribution) retirement plans, many plan sponsors permit an immediate distribution to an alternate payee, perhaps because a practitioner or service provider suggested that to do so is simpler than keeping a court order open for many years while waiting for the participant to reach an earliest retirement age. (That's been my advice.) Yet some plan sponsors might prefer to provide for not paying an alternate payee before the participant becomes entitled to receive a distribution or reaches age 50. (I'm not advocating this choice; rather, I'm curious about whether it's even practically available.) Does an IRS-preapproved document afford a user an adoption-agreement or other choice for not providing a QDRO distribution until the participant's earliest retirement age? Does the document your firm uses afford a choice on this plan-design point?

Please tell me if I am missing something. Plan is TH first year 64%. 3% is around $9,000. Discretionary non-elective of $1,400 would make the TH percentage 59.9 %. TH test is Accrual for the first year ....isn't it? Am I missing something?

Plan facts: 3%SH to all discretionary PS to all 3 HCES, 3NHCEs, young owner, mixed age staff each participant is in own allocation rate for PS Can the employer "cherry pick" a particular participant - who happens to be youngest and new ppt mid-year w lowest eligible pay - such that his own RG passes (a)(4)? The remaining NHCEs will receive at least GW minimum. Doing this passes all (a)(4) testing, 410b easily. My hesitation is because of perceived bottom up allocation... would it be better to "cherry pick" an existing but younger ppt who earns $100k (obviously more expensive to do so)? FYI, the other 2 HCEs are receiving the 3% SH plus 1% PS, their indiv RGs pass easily. Thank you.

Has anyone ever heard of a DB plan not having trustees? I'm being told only 401k and 401a plans require trustees. Is that true? and if so, what is the authority for this? Thanks

Does anyone have any idea of the percentage of plans that have 3(38) vs 3(21)?