Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Valuing Benefits, 81122-81123 [2020-27377]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
81122
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
$0.36 + $5 = $5.36). The $5 increase in
copayment in this Example 7 is less
than the amount calculated pursuant to
paragraph (g)(1)(iv)(A) of this section of
$5.36. Thus, the $5 increase in
copayment does not cause the plan to
cease to be a grandfathered health plan.
Example 8. (i) Facts. On March 23,
2010, a self-insured group health plan
provides two tiers of coverage—selfonly and family. The employer
contributes 80% of the total cost of
coverage for self-only and 60% of the
total cost of coverage for family.
Subsequently, the employer reduces the
contribution to 50% for family coverage,
but keeps the same contribution rate for
self-only coverage.
(ii) Conclusion. In this Example 8, the
decrease of 10 percentage points for
family coverage in the contribution rate
based on cost of coverage causes the
plan to cease to be a grandfathered
health plan. The fact that the
contribution rate for self-only coverage
remains the same does not change the
result.
Example 9. (i) Facts. On March 23,
2010, a self-insured grandfathered
health plan has a COBRA premium for
the 2010 plan year of $5,000 for selfonly coverage and $12,000 for family
coverage. The required employee
contribution for the coverage is $1,000
for self-only coverage and $4,000 for
family coverage. Thus, the contribution
rate based on cost of coverage for 2010
is 80% ((5,000¥1,000)/5,000) for selfonly coverage and 67%
((12,000¥4,000)/12,000) for family
coverage. For a subsequent plan year,
the COBRA premium is $6,000 for selfonly coverage and $15,000 for family
coverage. The employee contributions
for that plan year are $1,200 for selfonly coverage and $5,000 for family
coverage. Thus, the contribution rate
based on cost of coverage is 80%
((6,000¥1,200)/6,000) for self-only
coverage and 67% ((15,000¥5,000)/
15,000) for family coverage.
(ii) Conclusion. In this Example 9,
because there is no change in the
contribution rate based on cost of
coverage, the plan retains its status as a
grandfathered health plan. The result
would be the same if all or part of the
employee contribution was made pretax through a cafeteria plan under
section 125 of the Internal Revenue
Code.
Example 10. (i) Facts. A group health
plan not maintained pursuant to a
collective bargaining agreement offers
three benefit packages on March 23,
2010. Option F is a self-insured option.
Options G and H are insured options.
Beginning July 1, 2013, the plan
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 Dec 14, 2020
Jkt 253001
increases coinsurance under Option H
from 10% to 15%.
(ii) Conclusion. In this Example 10,
the coverage under Option H is not
grandfathered health plan coverage as of
July 1, 2013, consistent with the rule in
paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section.
Whether the coverage under Options F
and G is grandfathered health plan
coverage is determined separately under
the rules of this paragraph (g).
Example 11. (i) Facts. A group health
plan that is a grandfathered health plan
and also a high deductible health plan
within the meaning of section 223(c)(2)
of the Internal Revenue Code had a
$2,400 deductible for family coverage
on March 23, 2010. The plan is
subsequently amended after June 15,
2021 to increase the deductible limit by
the amount that is necessary to comply
with the requirements for a plan to
qualify as a high deductible health plan
under section 223(c)(2)(A) of the
Internal Revenue Code, but that exceeds
the maximum percentage increase.
(ii) Conclusion. In this Example 11,
the increase in the deductible at that
time does not cause the plan to cease to
be a grandfathered health plan because
the increase was necessary for the plan
to continue to satisfy the definition of a
high deductible health plan under
section 223(c)(2)(A) of the Internal
Revenue Code.
[FR Doc. 2020–27498 Filed 12–11–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY
CORPORATION
29 CFR Part 4044
Allocation of Assets in SingleEmployer Plans; Interest Assumptions
for Valuing Benefits
Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule amends the
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s
regulation on Allocation of Assets in
Single-Employer Plans to prescribe
interest assumptions under the asset
allocation regulation for plans with
valuation dates in the first quarter of
2021. These interest assumptions are
used for valuing benefits under
terminating single-employer plans and
for other purposes.
DATES: Effective January 1, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory Katz (katz.gregory@pbgc.gov),
Attorney, Regulatory Affairs Division,
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,
1200 K Street NW, Washington, DC
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20005, 202–229–3829. (TTY users may
call the Federal relay service toll free at
1–800–877–8339 and ask to be
connected to 202–229–3829.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PBGC’s
regulation on Allocation of Assets in
Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part
4044) prescribes actuarial
assumptions—including interest
assumptions—for valuing benefits under
terminating single-employer plans
covered by title IV of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA). The interest assumptions in
the regulation are also published on
PBGC’s website (https://www.pbgc.gov).
PBGC uses the interest assumptions in
appendix B to part 4044 (‘‘Interest Rates
Used to Value Benefits’’) to determine
the present value of annuities in an
involuntary or distress termination of a
single-employer plan under the asset
allocation regulation. The assumptions
are also used to determine the value of
multiemployer plan benefits and certain
assets when a plan terminates by mass
withdrawal in accordance with PBGC’s
regulation on Duties of Plan Sponsor
Following Mass Withdrawal (29 CFR
part 4281).
The first quarter 2021 interest
assumptions will be 1.69 percent for the
first 20 years following the valuation
date and 1.66 percent thereafter. In
comparison with the interest
assumptions in effect for the fourth
quarter of 2020, these interest
assumptions represent no change in the
select period (the period during which
the select rate (the initial rate) applies),
an increase of 0.07 percent in the select
rate, and an increase of 0.26 percent in
the ultimate rate (the final rate).
Need for Immediate Guidance
PBGC has determined that notice of,
and public comment on, this rule are
impracticable, unnecessary, and
contrary to the public interest. PBGC
routinely updates the interest
assumptions in appendix B of the asset
allocation regulation each quarter so
that they are available to value benefits.
Accordingly, PBGC finds that the public
interest is best served by issuing this
rule expeditiously, without an
opportunity for notice and comment,
and that good cause exists for making
the assumptions set forth in this
amendment effective less than 30 days
after publication to allow the use of the
proper assumptions to estimate the
value of plan benefits for plans with
valuation dates early in the first quarter
of 2021.
PBGC has determined that this action
is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under the criteria set forth in Executive
Order 12866.
E:\FR\FM\15DER1.SGM
15DER1
81123
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Because no general notice of proposed
rulemaking is required for this
amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility
Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C.
601(2).
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4044
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3),
1341, 1344, 1362.
In consideration of the foregoing, 29
CFR part 4044 is amended as follows:
2. In appendix B to part 4044, add an
entry for ‘‘January–March 2021’’ at the
end of the table to read as follows:
■
PART 4044—ALLOCATION OF
ASSETS IN SINGLE-EMPLOYER
PLANS
Appendix B to Part 4044—Interest
Rates Used to Value Benefits
1. The authority citation for part 4044
continues to read as follows:
Employee benefit plans, Pension
insurance, Pensions.
■
*
*
*
*
*
The values of it are:
For valuation dates occurring in the month—
it
*
*
*
January–March 2021 ........................................................
Issued in Washington, DC, by:
Hilary Duke,
Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory
Affairs, Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2020–27377 Filed 12–14–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7709–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Part 2
[Docket No. PTO–T–2019–0027]
RIN 0651–AD42
Trademark Fee Adjustment
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective
date.
AGENCY:
On November 17, 2020, the
United States Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO) published in the
Federal Register a final rule on setting
and adjusting trademark fees that is
scheduled to go into effect on January 2,
2021. This final rule changes the
effective date of one fee paid by
international applicants under the
Madrid Protocol from January 2, 2021,
to February 18, 2021.
DATES: The effective date of 37 CFR
2.6(a)(1)(ii), amended at 85 FR 73197,
November 17, 2020, is delayed from
January 2, 2021, to February 18, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Catherine Cain, Office of the Deputy
Commissioner for Trademark
Examination Policy, at 571–272–8946,
or by email at TMPolicy@uspto.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
USPTO published a final rule (85 FR
73197, Nov. 17, 2020) that set or
adjusted certain trademark fees, as
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 Dec 14, 2020
Jkt 253001
for t =
it
for t =
1–20
*
0.0166
>20
*
0.0169
authorized by the Leahy-Smith America
Invents Act, as amended by the Study
of Underrepresented Classes Chasing
Engineering and Science Success Act of
2018. Those fee changes allow the
USPTO to continue to recover the
prospective aggregate costs of strategic
and operational trademark and
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
goals (based on workload projections
included in the USPTO fiscal year 2021
Congressional Justification), including
associated administrative costs, and to
further USPTO strategic objectives by
better aligning fees with costs,
protecting the integrity of the trademark
register, improving the efficiency of
agency processes, and ensuring
financial sustainability to facilitate
effective trademark operations.
Among the changes in the November
17, 2020 final rule, the USPTO amended
the fee at 37 CFR 2.6(a)(1)(ii) addressing
applications under section 66(a) of the
Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1141f. This
fee, paid by international applicants
designating the United States under the
World Intellectual Property
Organization’s (WIPO) Protocol Relating
to the Madrid Agreement Concerning
the International Registration of Marks
(Madrid Protocol), is set to increase
from $400 to $500.
This final rule delays the effective
date of the change to § 2.6(a)(1)(ii)
because the treaty requires three months
advance notice to WIPO, which then
alerts international applicants, before an
increase in the amount of the
international application/subsequent
designation fee can enter into force. On
November 18, 2020, the USPTO
provided WIPO with the required notice
of the change to § 2.6(a)(1)(ii). Thus, the
effective date of § 2.6(a)(1)(ii) is delayed
from January 2, 2021, to February 18,
2021, three months following the
notification.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
it
*
for t =
*
N/A
N/A
Rulemaking Requirements
A. Administrative Procedure Act: This
final rule revises the effective date of
§ 2.6(a)(1)(ii). This action relates to the
setting or adjusting of trademark fees
and is a rule of agency practice and
procedure and/or an interpretive rule
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). See JEM
Broad. Co. v. F.C.C., 22 F.3d 32 (D.C.
Cir. 1994) (‘‘[T]he ‘critical feature’ of the
procedural exception [in 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A)] ‘is that it covers agency
actions that do not themselves alter the
rights or interests of parties, although
[they] may alter the manner in which
the parties present themselves or their
viewpoints to the agency.’ ’’ (quoting
Batterton v. Marshall, 648 F.2d 694, 707
(D.C. Cir. 1980))); see also Bachow
Commc’ns Inc. v. F.C.C., 237 F.3d 683,
690 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (rules governing an
application process are procedural
under the Administrative Procedure
Act); Inova Alexandria Hosp. v. Shalala,
244 F.3d 342, 350 (4th Cir. 2001) (rules
for handling appeals were procedural
where they did not change the
substantive standard for reviewing
claims). Accordingly, prior notice and
opportunity for public comment are not
required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or
(c) (or any other law). See Cooper Techs.
Co. v. Dudas, 536 F.3d 1330, 1336–37
(Fed. Cir. 2008) (stating that 5 U.S.C.
553, and thus 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2)(B), do
not require notice and comment
rulemaking for ‘‘interpretative rules,
general statements of policy, or rules of
agency organization, procedure, or
practice’’ (quoting 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)).
Moreover, the Director of the USPTO,
pursuant to authority at 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) and (d)(1), finds good cause to
adopt the change in this final rule
without prior notice and an opportunity
for public comment or a 30-day delay in
effectiveness, as such procedures would
be impracticable and contrary to the
public interest. Immediate
implementation of the change to the
E:\FR\FM\15DER1.SGM
15DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 241 (Tuesday, December 15, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81122-81123]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27377]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION
29 CFR Part 4044
Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans; Interest
Assumptions for Valuing Benefits
AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation's regulation on Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer
Plans to prescribe interest assumptions under the asset allocation
regulation for plans with valuation dates in the first quarter of 2021.
These interest assumptions are used for valuing benefits under
terminating single-employer plans and for other purposes.
DATES: Effective January 1, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Katz ([email protected]),
Attorney, Regulatory Affairs Division, Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation, 1200 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20005, 202-229-3829. (TTY
users may call the Federal relay service toll free at 1-800-877-8339
and ask to be connected to 202-229-3829.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PBGC's regulation on Allocation of Assets in
Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4044) prescribes actuarial
assumptions--including interest assumptions--for valuing benefits under
terminating single-employer plans covered by title IV of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The interest
assumptions in the regulation are also published on PBGC's website
(https://www.pbgc.gov).
PBGC uses the interest assumptions in appendix B to part 4044
(``Interest Rates Used to Value Benefits'') to determine the present
value of annuities in an involuntary or distress termination of a
single-employer plan under the asset allocation regulation. The
assumptions are also used to determine the value of multiemployer plan
benefits and certain assets when a plan terminates by mass withdrawal
in accordance with PBGC's regulation on Duties of Plan Sponsor
Following Mass Withdrawal (29 CFR part 4281).
The first quarter 2021 interest assumptions will be 1.69 percent
for the first 20 years following the valuation date and 1.66 percent
thereafter. In comparison with the interest assumptions in effect for
the fourth quarter of 2020, these interest assumptions represent no
change in the select period (the period during which the select rate
(the initial rate) applies), an increase of 0.07 percent in the select
rate, and an increase of 0.26 percent in the ultimate rate (the final
rate).
Need for Immediate Guidance
PBGC has determined that notice of, and public comment on, this
rule are impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public
interest. PBGC routinely updates the interest assumptions in appendix B
of the asset allocation regulation each quarter so that they are
available to value benefits. Accordingly, PBGC finds that the public
interest is best served by issuing this rule expeditiously, without an
opportunity for notice and comment, and that good cause exists for
making the assumptions set forth in this amendment effective less than
30 days after publication to allow the use of the proper assumptions to
estimate the value of plan benefits for plans with valuation dates
early in the first quarter of 2021.
PBGC has determined that this action is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the criteria set forth in Executive Order
12866.
[[Page 81123]]
Because no general notice of proposed rulemaking is required for
this amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 does not apply.
See 5 U.S.C. 601(2).
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4044
Employee benefit plans, Pension insurance, Pensions.
In consideration of the foregoing, 29 CFR part 4044 is amended as
follows:
PART 4044--ALLOCATION OF ASSETS IN SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 4044 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3), 1341, 1344, 1362.
0
2. In appendix B to part 4044, add an entry for ``January-March 2021''
at the end of the table to read as follows:
Appendix B to Part 4044--Interest Rates Used to Value Benefits
* * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The values of i are:
For valuation dates -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
occurring in the month-- i for t = i for t = i for t =
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
January-March 2021.......... 0.0169 1-20 0.0166 >20 N/A N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issued in Washington, DC, by:
Hilary Duke,
Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs, Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2020-27377 Filed 12-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7709-02-P
