Skip to main content

This page has not been translated. Please go to PBGC.gov's Spanish home page for more information available in Spanish.

Esta página no ha sido traducida. Por favor vaya a la página principal del sitio de español de PBGC para ver información disponible en español.

Termination

  • Opinion Letter 76-03

    Plan administrator must allocate assets to participant receiving early retirement benefits and may not allocate assets to participants whose benefit claims had been fully satisfied prior to termination of plan.

    • document
  • Opinion Letter 91-01

    Once irrevocable commitments are purchased, PBGC no longer guarantees the benefits.

    • document
  • Opinion Letter 84-06

    Denies a Notice of Intent to Terminate on the basis that the plan did not intend to provide for annuity purchase for actives, instead spinning them off into a new plan.

    • document
  • Opinion Letter 85-21

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

    • document
  • Opinion Letter 81-08

    A plan did not properly terminate and does not fit the exemption from Title IV coverage for plans that do not provide for employer contributions.

    • document
  • Opinion Letter 82-28

    Whether the method of distribution proposed for a plan is acceptable when the plan administrator is terminating its DB plan and creating a DC plan.

    • document
  • Opinion Letter 76-94

    Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 76-94 July 28, 1976 RE FERENCE: [*1] 404 4(a) Allocation of Assets. Requirement of Following Statutory Allocation Provisions OP INION: Th is is in response to your lett er and subsequent phone conversation with Mr. Anderson of my staff, concerningthe rights o f a participant of the Country Belle Cooperative Farmers Salaried Retirement Plan (the "Plan"). As we underst and the pertinent facts, the participant had certain vested benefits under the Plan when he ter minatedhis em ployment in 1969. However, this participant contested the plan administrator's determination of t he amount ofhis vested benefit and the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County (the "Court"), in a judgment entere d on Decem ber 27, 1974, decided the amount of his benefit. A termin ation no tice has been filed with thisCorporat ion proposi ng a termination date for the Plan of July 11, 1975. The participant's benefit has not yet been paid.In vie w of the above, you aske d our opinion of the priority of plan asset allocation for this part icipant's benefit. Anyben efit which s hould have been in pay stat us before the plan termination date, but which has not been paid prior to suchdate, is a pre-t ermination plan liability payable out of t he plan assets [*2] prior to allocation of assets under Section 4044of T itle IV. You also as ked what rate of int erest, if any, should be paid. We understand that the amount of intere st payable isprese ntly being adjudicated. We shall await the Court's decision regarding this issue. Final ly, you asked in w hat manner the benefits should be paid. The benefits should be paid in accordance with the plan d ocument. W e hope this is of assistance. Henry Rose Ge neral Counsel

    • document
  • Opinion Letter 75-115

    Discusses that change of insurance carrier is not a termination nor a reportable event

    • document
  • Opinion Letter 85-30

    A terminated multiemployer plan cannot transfer assets and liabilities to other multiemployer plans pursuant to reciprocity agreement.

    • document