Regulators Seek Comment on Guidance for 'Non-Traditional' DB Benefits

January 29, 2007 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - The Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Department are asking for public comment on how the agencies should regulate the inclusion of certain non-traditional benefits in qualified defined benefit plans.

align=”left”>Regulators said the input may be used generally to allow them to prepare more specific guidance on the types of benefits properly included in a qualified DB plan.

align=”left”>In an IRS notice , the agencies said examples of benefits about which it has concern include those that are payable only on the involuntary termination of an employee or in other limited circumstances that are unrelated to retirement; as well as those that could exceed the amount of the plan’s accrued benefit.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan benefits news.

align=”left”>The guidance might specifically deal with the issue of plant shutdown benefits and similar ancillary benefits.  Regulators said that, for example,  the guidance might require that the benefit be payable as a result of an objectively defined plant shutdown event, such as one that requires notice under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1988.

align=”left”>Finally, according to the regulators, the guidance might deal with contingent accruals and early retirement benefits. The guidance might provide that, except for the payment of the accrued benefit in an optional form, a retirement-type benefit  is permitted to be provided in a qualified defined benefit plan only if the amount of the benefit is no greater than the unreduced accrued benefit provided under the plan.

align=”left”>If these benefits are contingent on future events that are not reasonably and reliably predictable on an actuarial basis (such as a participant’s death), regulators said it is difficult to determine whether they comply with the incidental benefit requirements. .

Also, the regulators said that benefits payable only upon an employee’s involuntary separation from service raise questions regarding whether the availability of the benefits is based on conditions that are within the employer’s control, and whether such benefits circumvent the vesting and antibackloading protections of § 411, and the definitely determinable benefits requirement of § 401(a).

Written comments should be submitted by May 13, 2007. Send submissions to CC:PA:LPD:PR, (Notice 2007-14), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, D.C. 20044.Comments may also be hand delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to Internal Revenue Service, CC:PA:LPD:PR, (Notice 2007-14), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington DC.Comments may be submitted via the Internet at   notice.comments@irscounsel.treas.gov(Notice 2007-14).

Super Bowl Talk Isn't Cheap

January 26, 2007 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - With the Super Bowl only a week away, the folks at Challenger, Gray & Christmas have once again attempted to quantify the impact on workplace productivity.

In fact, the various partying plans, pooling, and/or surfing for information about Super Bowl XLI could cost employers some $800 million in lost productivity this next week, according to the outplacement firm.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANSPONSOR NEWSDash daily newsletter.

In Chicago and Indianapolis, the two cities whose National Football League teams will face off on February 4 – losses could reach $85 million, according to the firm’s estimates. In Indianapolis workers are expected to cost their employers $2.5 million for every ten minutes of lost productivity, while Chicago employers could lose $14.6 million for the same time.

The firm says that if employees spend 10 minutes a day focused on the game, that adds up to $162.1 million per day, based on average earnings and expected viewership.

The Mourning After

Then there is the day after the championship when people discuss the game’s plays, the TV commercials, or simply call in sick, resulting in more money lost, the outplacement consultant reported.

None of this contemplates the positive impact that the event surely has on the economy – well, at least certain food and beverage producers. And what Madison Avenue do, shorn of the nation’s willingness to actually wait FOR the commercials?

Ultimately, of course, if there wasn’t the Super Bowl, it would probably be American Idol, 24, or Desperate Housewives. Or surveys about how much time we’re wasting talking about such things.

At least we’re talking.

«