1 See Institute Memorandum to Pension Members No. 77-98, dated December 21, 1998.
2 See Institute Memorandum to Pension Committee No. 67-98 and Pension Operations Advisory Committee No.
50–98, dated October 8, 1998.
3 See Institute Memorandum to Operations Members No. 8-99, Pension Members No. 13-99, Pension Operations
Advisory Committee No. 11-99, Tax Members No. 12-99 and Transfer Agent Advisory Committee No. 16-99,
dated February 25, 1999.
[10805]
March 17, 1999
TO: PENSION COMMITTEE No. 16-99
PENSION OPERATIONS ADVISORY COMMITTEE No. 17-99
FEBRUARY 18 CONFERENCE CALL ATTENDEES
RE: INSTITUTE SUBMITS COMMENTS ON IRS TECHNOLOGY PROPOSALS
______________________________________________________________________________
The Institute has submitted comments on the Internal Revenue Service’s proposed
regulations regarding “paperless technologies.” Proposed regulations were published in
December, 1998.1 These comments were developed with the assistance of participating Institute
members.
In the letter, the Institute states its support of the Service’s proposal to permit the use of
“paperless” technologies to deliver various notices and receive various participant elections and
consents. The proposed regulations generally adopt the approach that the Institute had
suggested in an earlier comment letter in October, 1998.2 The Institute urges the prompt
adoption of final regulations and recommends a few minor changes.
The proposed regulations permit the oral delivery of summaries of section 402(f) and
section 411(a)(11) notices if full notices were previously delivered, for instance, as part of a
summary plan description (SPD). The Institute recommends the Service eliminate the proposed
requirement that these notice summaries include disclosure of when and where the full notice
was delivered. Specifically, providing a date and page number reference to each participant
would not be practical. The letter notes that plan participants may receive the SPD at different
times and, moreover, that the requirement would be burdensome for service providers to
implement, with little practical benefit.
The Institute also seeks to clarify that withholding elections under section 3405 could be
delivered via automated telephone systems or telephone systems using customer service
representatives, because Announcement 99-6,3 which would permit the electronic receipt of
Form W-4P information, speaks in only general terms about electronic delivery. Additionally,
the letter also seeks to clarify that where PIN numbers are used in lieu of a traditional signature
for Form W-4P purposes,they may be provided at the beginning of an automated telephone
system election, rather than at the end of the call. Finally, the letter requests clarification as to
the kinds of records, such as audio recordings, automated voice response entries, and notations
by telephone representatives, that would need to be retained in lieu of a Form W-4P.
A copy of the comment letter is attached.
Russell G. Galer
Senior Counsel