- 10 -
office on the answers to the following questions: (1) Whether
the benefit provided under article 8 is an accrued benefit under
section 411(a)(7)(A)(i) for pre-1991 retirees; and (2) whether
the amendment that discontinued NPF COLAs for pre-1991 retirees
reduced those participants’ accrued benefits in violation of
section 411(d)(6)(A).
By letter dated September 8, 1999, the District Office sent
a copy of the TAM to the Plan’s counsel. The TAM concludes that
the amendment to article 8 violates section 411(d)(6). The
letter asked the Plan to submit a corrective amendment. By
letter dated October 4, 1999, the Plan’s counsel notified the
District Office that petitioner did not intend to make any
corrective amendment to the Plan.
On March 6, 2000, respondent issued to the Plan a final
adverse determination letter that stated that the Plan failed to
qualify under section 401(a) for 1995 and thereafter. It also
stated that the trust underlying the Plan was not exempt from
Federal income taxation under section 501(a) for the related
years. The adverse determination was generally based upon the
reasons stated in the TAM.
Discussion
We must decide whether the NPF COLA is an accrued benefit of
the pre-1991 retirees, the elimination of which violated the
anticutback rule of section 411(d)(6). Petitioner maintains that
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011