Opinion letters database

Addresses whether various business transactions would be considered a withdrawal.

Purchase of annuity contract in satisfaction of all accrued benefits is permissible under Title IV. Formal termination of the plan's trust is not required to effect a termination of the Plan. PBGC doesn't object to the holding of the annuity contract by the trust created under the Plan.

Application of § 4217(a) to determination of annual withdrawal liability payment under § 4219(c)(1).

Whether the asset reversion guidelines of May 23, 1984, apply to a transfer of assets and liabilities from a single-employer pension plan to a multiemployer plan, with a resulting termination of single-employer plan.

Payment of guaranteed benefits not authorized if plan terminated and paid for accrued benefits through annuity purchase.

PBGC's interpretation of its regulation governing default for non-payment of withdrawal liability under ERISA.

Whether a reciprocity agreement entered into by union and employer trustees of pension plans, both defined benefit and defined contribution, operates to impose on certain employers and defined contribution pension plans the minimum contribution requirements of § 4243 or the withdrawal liability provisions of § 4201.

Implementation Guidelines do not apply to split-up of pension plan, with subsequent termination of one plan and reversion of excess assets to the Company.

Requirements for avoiding withdrawal liability under § 4204; decision whether to waive the obligation of the Seller to post a liquidation bond is one that must be made by the Plan.

Revising Opinion Letter 85-1 concerning the meaning of phrase "equal installments" in § 4219(c)(3).

Question concerning whether a seller and a purchaser can retroactively bring a sale of assets within the coverage of § 4204 by posting a bond or amending sales contract. The opinion states that it is a plan's responsibility to determine whether a withdrawal has occurred, including whether conditions of § 4204 have been met.

Question concerning whether a partial withdrawal under §4205 has occurred when there has been entry into a concessions agreement with an employer that has previously made contributions to a multiemployer plan, and then will stop contributions for 18 months, and then make contributions retroactively, if still in business.

Discussion concerning § 4204 which allows an employer to avoid liability if a sales transaction meets the statutory conditions. A plan may find under all circumstances that § 4212(c) was violated but applying § 4204 to a sales transaction doesn't by itself violate § 4212(c).

Discussion concerning "Joint employer doctrine" under the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") as it may apply under Title IV. Specifically, whether company that is not a signatory to an agreement under which contributions are required to be made to a multiemployer pension plan, but is a "joint employer" for purposes of the NLRA with such a company, can be liable for a complete or a partial withdrawal under § 4201. If no contributions were required to be made by employer, ordinarily no liability.

Calculation of partial withdrawal liability using the allocation fraction under § 4206 of ERISA and PBGC's response that it has no authority to alter this provision by regulation. Resolution of disputes is left to dispute resolution process of §§ 4219 and 4221.

Discussion of whether term "retail food industry" as used in § 4205(c) encompasses the food service industry.

A split-up of one plan and the termination of another is not subject to the asset reversion implementation guidelines; PBGC recognizes the termination and reestablishment of a plan.

The purchase of participating group annuity contracts to satisfy all accrued benefits with a termination/reestablishment transaction of a plan is permissible.

Plan assets were sufficient to cover guaranteed benefits, but uncertain whether assets will cover all accrued benefits under the plan or whether there will be residual parts; proposal to split the plan into two parts. Transaction does not fall within the purview of the joint implementation guidelines since no assets will revert to the plan sponsor.

Payment of pension plan termination insurance premiums within a factual context. (Based on old definition of participant.)

Question concerning whether an employer is liable under the construction industry rule under §4203(b) when the employer ceases making contributions to a construction industry pension plan but continues in business through subcontractors.

Concerning § 4211 as it relates to the allocation of unfunded vested benefits in multiemployer pension plans to which employee contributions are made by employees of some but not all of the contributing employers.

A restated plan document created an aggregate of single plans and not a single pension plan, with a valid allocation of assets among those separate plans.

This opinion letter addresses a quarterly payment and adjustments (with correction in Op. 85-18) and interest for period between date of withdrawal and date of demand

Discussion of meaning of "employer" as that term is used in Title IV with respect to withdrawals from multiemployer pension plans, where there is a common law employer and another with obligation to contribute under CBA.