Registered pension plans (RPPs) frequently asked questions

1. What is the "growing in" rule and how does it apply to a member who retires early, in accordance with paragraph 8503(3)(c) of the Regulations, but elects a deferred pension?
The early retirement reduction formula in paragraph 8503(3)(c) of the Regulations is:

X × (1-.0025 × Y)

Variable X is the amount of the member's unreduced lifetime retirement benefits. Variable Y is the number of months from the day lifetime retirement benefits (LRB's) commence to be paid to the day that is the earliest of the day that a member could have retired with an unreduced pension. One of these factors permit a member to retire without reduction if the combination of their age and early retirement eligibility service total 80 points. By combining age and service in reducing the member's LRB 's, each month in the period between the day payment of LRB 's commence and the day an unreduced pension could have been paid had the member continued in employment counts as two points. The effect, called the growing in rule when it is applied during a deferral period, is that component Y of the reduction is reduced by half when compared to a reduction based only on age or service.

Example:

A member retires at age 46 with 12 years of service. The member elects to defer receipt of their pension until age 57. The member's age, combined with the Y factor is equal to 80. (The member is 57, plus 12 years of service, plus another 11 years of deferral, total 80). The legislation does not require the member's pension to be reduced at age 57.

2. For the purposes of determining maximum early retirement benefit levels, subparagraph 8503(3)(c)(iii) defines "early retirement eligibility service" to include a "period throughout which the member was employed by an employer who has participated in the plan". Would this period include leaves of temporary absence and periods of layoff, subject to recall?
Subparagraph 8503(3)(c)(iii) of the Regulations defines early retirement eligibility service as a period of pensionable service or as a period throughout which the member was employed by an employer who participated in the plan or by a predecessor employer to such an employer.

Subparagraph 8503(3)(a)(iii) of the Regulations permits an eligible period of temporary absence, which includes a leave of absence or a period of layoff, to be included as eligible or pensionable service under a pension plan. If the terms of a plan as registered include in pensionable service periods of lay off and leaves of absence, these periods may be included as pensionable service for early retirement eligibility purposes.

It is a question of fact as to whether the employee/employer relationship has been severed in a particular situation. An opinion as to whether this relationship has been severed would be determined on a case by case basis.

3. Can a registered pension plan administrator increase the joint and survivor option from a 60% to a 66 2/3% survivor pension after the member has commenced receiving pension benefits?
The Income Tax Act and Regulations does not prevent such an increase when a member has commenced receipt of their pension.

Paragraph 8503(2)(a) provides that lifetime retirement benefits must be payable in equal and periodic amounts. There are some exceptions to this rule, for example, benefits may be adjusted for inflation, or reduced upon the death of the member's spouse.

Paragraph 8503(2)(d) and subparagraph 8503(2)(a)(i) do not provide that the surviving spouse's benefit must meet the equal and periodic rule and do not prevent such an increase. Although the value of the benefit would increase and additional funding would be necessary, the Regulations permit such an increase.

4. Paragraph 8503(3)(g) of the Regulations limits the accrual rate of a defined benefit plan to 2%. In a 2% plan that provides a joint and survivor pension with a 5 year guarantee, would the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) allow a member to choose an optional Life only pension? The actuarial equivalent of this optional form of pension might exceed 2%.
The intent of paragraph 8503(3)(g) is to limit the benefit accrual rate under the normal form of pension payable to two percent. The effective benefit accrual rate, the accrual rate resulting from an optional form of pension that is the actuarial equivalent of the normal form, may exceed two percent. Pension plans that offer an optional form of pension where the effective benefit accrual rate exceeds two percent must state that the optional forms will be the actuarial equivalent of the normal form, and explicitly limit both the normal and optional forms of lifetime retirement benefits paid to the maximum pension limits in section 8504 of the Regulations.

5. A member terminates from their registered pension plan in 1995 and immediately transfers the commuted value of their benefits to a registered retirement savings plan (RRSP), in accordance with the Income Tax Act and Regulations. In 1999, the plan is wound up and there is an actuarial surplus in the plan. The employer decides to provide ancillary benefits to the plan members with this surplus. Can the member transfer the value of these ancillary benefits to their RRSP , even though they have already transferred the commuted value of their benefits out of the plan?
Subsection 8501(7) of the Regulations, which applies to benefits provided after 1996, contains a provision which generally allows surplus under a defined benefit provision to be used on wind up of the plan to provide for stand alone ancillary benefits to former members. Subsection 8517(3.1) allows the individual to use previously unused transfer room determined under section 8517 to accommodate a rollover of these ancillary benefits. In accordance with paragraph 8501(7)(e) of the Regulations, Ministerial approval is required regarding these transfers. We will require a demonstration indicating that the sum of the commuted value of the new ancillaries plus the commuted value of the original entitlement does not exceed the prescribed amount that was determined at the time of the initial transfer.

If the members had terminated after 1996, they may only have these stand alone ancillary benefits provided in respect of pre-1990 service. This is to ensure that these individuals are not provided with benefits that, had they been provided before the first termination, would have affected the determination of the pension adjustment reversal (PAR).

6. Bill C-23 introduced the term "common-law partner", which is defined as two persons who cohabit in a conjugal relationship and have done so for at least one year, or two persons who are the parents of a common child and cohabit in a conjugal relationship. How does this new definition affect the registration of pension plans?
Since this new definition does not restrict the relationship to two people of the opposite sex, the CRA will register pension plans that provide survivor benefits to same-sex partners. Should a plan sponsor wish to have such a pension plan registered, he or she is invited to submit an application to the Registered Plans Directorate of the CRA .

7. Will this new definition apply retroactively to registered pension plans?
The new definition takes effect for 2001 and subsequent taxation years. Therefore, plans submitted for registration on or after January 1, 2001, that provide for same-sex survivor benefits will be registered. This also applies to existing registered pension plans that are amended on or after January 1, 2001, to provide for these benefits. Plans submitted for registration on or after April 23, 1998, but before January 1, 2001, or existing plans amended within these dates, that provided for survivor benefits to same-sex partners, were accepted because of the decision reached in the Rosenberg (CUPE) v. Canada court case.

8. Can the survivor benefits be transferred to same-sex (common-law) partners?
Since the addition of the term "common-law partner" applies to the entire Income Tax Act, same-sex couples now have the same transfer rights as couples of the opposite sex. However, these transfer rights are only applicable to the 2001 and subsequent taxation years.

9. The Regulations require that the plan administrator has to report the PAR amount to both CRA as well as to the employee. What are the plan administrator's obligations if the T10 that was mailed to the employee is returned because of an incorrect address?
Subsection 8404(4) of the Regulations state that the plan administrator "shall send the copy to the individual at the individual's latest known address".

The plan administrator still needs to send a copy to CRA . CRA will match the T10 with the employee's Income Tax Return and advise the employee of their increased RRSP room in their notice of assessment.

10. Would a plan amendment that alters the amount of pension being paid to retired members violate the "equal and periodic rule" of paragraph 8503(2)(a) of the Regulations?
No, a plan amendment that alters the benefits being paid to retirees or their beneficiaries would not violate the equal and periodic rule, provided that the payments were equal and periodic before the amendment, and continue to be equal and periodic after the amendment.

Such an amendment will be accepted only if the change in the amounts of benefits is done on a prospective basis, and do not provide benefits in excess of what the Income Tax Act would have permitted at commencement date. Catch up payments will not be accepted.

Built-in plan provisions that would allow pensions in pay to be automatically altered would violate the equal and periodic rule and will not be accepted.

11. There is a new trend where certain Individual Pension Plans are being established primarily to accept a transfer of funds from a prior registered pension plan. What is the CRA 's opinion of these plans?
We have noticed a trend in which individuals near normal retirement age leave large employers and establish their own corporation. The individual is hired by the corporation, and the corporation sponsors an individual pension plan (IPP) for the individual that recognizes the prior service under the public sector pension plan. Once the IPP is established, the full commuted value of the individual's prior pension is transferred to the IPP , as the transfer rules of the Income Tax Act do not limit transfers from one defined benefit plan to another. We are concerned that while some of these IPP s may be acceptable, many will not meet the requirements for registration under the Act.

The primary purpose of every registered pension plan must be to provide retirement benefits to individuals in respect of their service as employees. This requirement is reflected in the Act as a condition of registration. If it is determined that a plan is established for a reason other than this primary purpose, it will not qualify for registration under the Act.

The first issue we have with these arrangements is the legitimacy of the employee/employer relationship. Our concern is that the reason the corporation and the pension plan are being established is to avoid the transfer rules of the Act. If there is not a bona-fide relationship that has the employee rendering legitimate services to the employer, the plan will fail the primary purpose test.

Even if this relationship is established and nominal earnings are received, there may still be an issue with the primary purpose test. The Act only permits a pension plan to base retirement benefits on the earnings received from an employer who participates in the plan. In most cases, the earnings with the new corporation are much lower than what was received with the prior employer, and therefore the benefits under the IPP are significantly lower than the benefits that the individual would have received from the prior plan. This creates a large surplus in the IPP .

When an individual foregoes a substantial retirement benefit by transferring the associated funds to a recently established IPP that provides a much smaller retirement benefit, it can be argued that the primary purpose test is not met. In these cases, we may conclude that the primary purpose of establishing the IPP was to facilitate a transfer of funds from a prior plan that would have been limited by the Act had it been transferred to an RRSP . The conclusion that the primary purpose condition is not met is further supported by the fact that following the transfer, the IPP holds significant surplus assets rather than providing retirement benefits of a level comparable to those that would have been paid from the prior plan. As mentioned earlier, if the primary purpose of a plan is for any reason other than providing retirement benefits with respect to the individual's service as an employee, the plan will fail to qualify for registered status.

If it is apparent at the time of registration that the IPP will not meet the primary purpose test, the CRA will refuse to register the pension plan. Unfortunately, in many cases, it will not be apparent until a year or two later that the primary purpose test was not met. This situation can be more problematic for individuals as they may have already transferred funds into the IPP .

If it is determined that a registered plan does not, and never did, meet the primary purpose test, the plan's registered status can be revoked as of the original effective date. . The consequences to the member could be financially devastating if the CRA was to revoke the registration of the plan upon discovering that the purpose for incorporating a company was simply to establish a pension plan to hold the transferred pension for a specific member. The impact of this action is that all the assets of the plan would become taxable.

It is for this reason that we want to ensure that individuals are made aware of these concerns. We will be asking individuals for evidence of the following:

If these facts cannot be confirmed, we will consider that the plan does not meet the primary purpose and it will not be registered.

For more information on Individual Pension Plans, go to the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO).

12. Under a defined benefit provision, can a guarantee period be attached to a member's pension when a joint survivor option is elected with a dependant as the beneficiary?
Yes, paragraph 8503(2)(c) of the Regulations allows a guarantee to be attached to a member's pension. Clause 8503(2)(c)(i)(B) permits a 15-year guarantee when retirement benefits, permissible under paragraph 8503(2)(d), are not provided under the provision to a spouse or former spouse of the member.

Where retirement benefits, permissible under paragraph 8503(2)(d), are also provided under the provision to a spouse or former spouse of the member, clause 8503(2)(c)(i)(A) limits the guarantee period to 5 years.

Paragraph 8503(2)(k) permits the 5 year guarantee to be increased to 15 years on an actuarial equivalent basis, which means that the member has to forego a portion of their lifetime retirement benefits to get the increased guarantee.

13. What is a multi-employer plan (MEP)?
A MEP is a registered pension plan sponsored by a group of employers. However, not every plan in which more than one employer participates is considered a MEP .

We consider a registered pension plan to be a MEP if, at the beginning of the year, it is reasonable to expect that at no time in the year will more than 95 % of the active plan members be employed by a single participating employer, or by a group of related participating employers at any time during the year. The terms "related persons" and "related group" are defined in subsections 251(2) and 251(4) of the Income Tax Act, respectively. Additional information can also be found in Interpretation Bulletin IT-419R Meaning of Arm's Length.

What is a specified multi-employer plan (SMEP)?

A SMEP is a MEP that meets the following conditions: