From: Robert OConnor [mailto:rpatoconnor@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 6:15 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: RIN 1210-AB33

To: Employee Benefits Security Administration 

From: Bitter Senior Citizen 

I notified many of my fellow bitter citizens on behalf of your RFI. I received the 

following attachment along with the following assessment from one of these folks. I want 

to share these items with you: 

Thanks for the excerpt from the Rome paper. The author and I share the same sentiment 

about this plan. It might be a bitter pill to swallow though to liquidate one's whole nest 

egg -- the taxes would take at least half of it. I just don't believe that the Republicans 

would ever allow this to happen However, this plan has snuck under the MSM radar and 

unless people understand what's going on, the Dems could possibly get it through. 

I downloaded and read the Treasury/Labor Dept.'s RFI and found a few worrisome tidbits 

I'd like to share with you. 

Pp. 3 para B. Request for Information. 

"The purpose of this notice is to solicit views .... to assist the Agencies in evaluating what 

steps, if any, they could or should take, by regulation or otherwise, to enhance the 

retirement security of participants in employer-sponsored retirement plans and IRAs by 

faciltating access to, and use of, lifetime income or other arrangements designed to 

provide a stream of lifetime income after retirement." 

This opening paragraph clearly illustrates the intent for a "cram down their throats" 

approach. In fact, that's the overarching theme of the whole solicitation. They are clearly 

hell-bent to enact this lifetime income stream approach. I noticed they also alluded to 

some exotic structure instruments that may be considered in their implementation. 

General 

6. What types of lifetime income or other arrangements designed to 

provide a stream of income after retirement are available to 

individuals who have already received distributions from their plans 

(out-of-plan options), such as IRA products, and how are such 

arrangements being structured (fixed, inflation adjusted, or other 

variable, immediate or deferred, etc.)? Are there annuity products 

under which plan accumulations can be rolled over to an individual 

retirement annuity of the same issuer to retain the annuity purchase 

rights that were available under the plan? 
Here they even refer to rollover IRAs that current retirees have taken withdrawal 

distributions from. The implication is they would like to clawback those IRAs for the 

purpose of conversion to a lifetime annuity. This really sucks. 

11. Various ``behavioral'' strategies for encouraging greater use 

of lifetime income have been implemented or suggested based on evidence 

or assumptions concerning common participant behavior patterns and 

motivations. These strategies have included the use of default or 

automatic arrangements (similar to automatic enrollment in 401(k) 

plans) and a focus on other ways in which choices are structured or 

presented to participants, including efforts to mitigate ``all or 

nothing'' choices by offering lifetime income on a partial, gradual, or 

trial basis and exploring different ways to explain its advantages and 

disadvantages. To what extent are these or other behavioral strategies 

being used or viewed as promising means of encouraging more lifetime 

income? Can or should the 401(k) rules, other plan qualification rules, 

or ERISA rules be modified, or their application clarified, to 

facilitate the use of behavioral strategies in this context? 

Here they want to use slick marketing persuasion or flat out rule changing to force the 

lifetime annuity option upon the sheeple. 

12. How should participants determine what portion (if any) of 

their account balance to annuitize? Should that portion be based on 

basic or necessary expenses in retirement? 

Yeah how about a zero portion, is that an option? Of course not. 

13. Should some form of lifetime income distribution option be 

required for defined contribution plans (in addition to money purchase 

pension plans)? If so, should that option be the default distribution 

option, and should it apply to the entire account balance? To what 

extent would such a requirement encourage or discourage plan 

sponsorship? 

They clearly don't get it. People don't want the gov't to get their hands on their own hardearned nest egg. Period! They as much say that this program is a hard sell. Why are they 

so intent on making this happen? Well Obama has roughly $1.8 T of debt to finance this 

year, and the last auction had zero indirect bidders. That's right Nada - no foreign 

soverign bankers stepped up to the plate this time. So Uncle Sam has been looking 

around for some suckers to purchase his debt. And guess who he found -- you and your 

401Ks/IRAs. 

Participant Education 
28. How do the minimum required distribution rules affect defined contribution 

plans sponsors' and participants' interest in the offering and use of lifetime income?

Are there changes to those rules that could or should be made to encourage lifetime 

income without prejudice to other important policy objectives? In particular, how are 

deferred annuities that begin at an advanced age (sometimes referred to as longevity 

insurance) affected by these rules?

Are there changes to the rules that could or should be considered to encourage such 

arrangements? 

Here they want to change the Minimum Required Distribution rules on 401Ks/IRAs to 

make those less appealing than the lifetime annuities. I've even heard in other blogs that 

they are contemplating zero taxes on the first $10K of the annual lifetime income stream 

to discourage the use of MRDs (which are fully taxable). 

 38. Would making a lifetime annuity or other lifetime income product the default form 

of 

benefit payment have an impact on employee contribution rates? If so in which direction 

and why? 

Tell us more about this other lifetime income product you have in mind. Would this not 

be your infamous R bond? Yeah, full disclosure of your plans most probably would 

result in most people shunning all employee contribution plans in the future. 

Everybody who has read the RFI needs to get the word out fast to all their friends and 

families. Perhaps with enough outrage directed at the EBSA, we can turn this thing 

around. 

Yours Truly, 

Bitter Senior Citizen