Originally Posted by
pinseeker
You need to watch the videos again. They are talking about a capped earnings VB plan that follows the IRS earnings limit.
The modeler on the website uses a capped earnings VB plan as well. Just try putting in current earnings as $350K, then try putting in current earnings as $400K. The retirement number doesn't change.
Yes, the IRS allows for an uncapped plan such as the one MLB has, but we are not pursuing that type of plan according to the propaganda that has been distributed so far.
I hear what they keep saying, but I don't think they are using the terms correctly. Here are the IRS limits from their web site:
https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-ann...18500-for-2018
The only thing that even comes close to what they keep saying is
The annual compensation limit under Sections 401(a)(17), 404(l), 408(k)(3)(C), and 408(k)(6)(D)(ii) is increased from $270,000 to $275,000.
I'm not sure how that applies to our situation. If you have another reference I'm all for it, but I don't think so. There are max limits the IRS uses for computational purposes (what has to be deposited into the company accounts in order for the fund to be fully funded). That might be where those numbers keep coming from. The IRS has so many different types of limits keeping track of them is a full time job, which is why we don't do our own bookkeeping. Some are much higher like
The Code provides that the $1,000,000,000 threshold used to determine whether a multiemployer plan is a systemically important plan under Section 432(e)(9)(H)(v)(III)(aa) is adjusted using the cost-of-living adjustment provided under Section 432(e)(9)(H)(v)(III)(bb) All the things you would need to understand and apply to run or design a plan are staggering. That's being the Guinea pig on a new type of plan that does not exist seems really stupid.