IRS Notice 2026-33, released April 16, 2026, publishes three segment rates and the corresponding 24-month averages. The tables look procedural. Section 417(e)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code makes those three spot rates the legally required floor on lump sums paid from qualified defined benefit plans.
The April print runs 47 basis points above the prior three-month average on the first segment and 38 on the third. A 40-plus-basis-point monthly move is not unprecedented, but it is large enough to reprice every 2027 lump sum window still in design.
Key Takeaways
- +47 and +38 basis points on the first and third segments against the rolling three-month average, with the second segment up roughly 42. The move is concentrated in the front of the segment structure.
- A $3,000 monthly benefit at 65 prices at roughly $460,000 under the rate set a 2026 window would have used, against $438,000 on the April numbers, a 4.8 percent reduction.
- 5.9 percent at age 55 against 3.6 percent at 75: the reduction widens with the length of the discounting horizon, because more of a younger participant's benefit sits in the second and third segments.
- A five-month lookback on a calendar-year plan means the August 2026 print governs every lump sum paid in 2027. April sits inside the window of months that becomes next year's anchor.
- Paying below the 417(e) minimum is a qualification defect requiring correction under EPCRS, which is why the monthly print is a hard input rather than a directional signal.
What Notice 2026-33 Publishes
The Notice sets the minimum present value segment rates for April 2026 from the prior month's high-quality corporate bond yield curve. The three segments cover distributions expected in the first five years after the annuity starting date, years six through twenty, and years after twenty.
The same Notice republishes the 24-month average segment rates used for funding under Section 430, together with the HATFA and BBA 2015 corridor-adjusted rates most single-employer sponsors use for minimum required contributions and PBGC variable-rate premiums. Two rate streams, one underlying curve, different uses.
Only the spot rates matter for lump sums. Plans use the lookback-month spot rates their document specifies, with no smoothing corridor. That is the distinction that gets lost most often, because funding actuaries spend their time on the smoothed funding yield curve and the lump sum track runs parallel to it.
The move itself is uneven across the curve. First segment up 47 basis points, second roughly 42, third up 38, all against the rolling average of the prior three prints. Plans with retiree-heavy blocks feel the first and second segment moves; plans with younger active populations feel the third.
Stability Period, Lookback, and What the Repricing Does
The stability period and applicable month are what turn a monthly publication into a payable number. Treasury Reg. 1.417(e)-1(d) lets a sponsor choose a stability period of one month, one quarter, or one plan year, and a lookback month one to five months before it starts.
The plan-year period with a five-month lookback is the common design for large single-employer plans, because it gives benefits and payroll five months to load firm factors ahead of a January distribution calendar. A calendar-year plan on that design uses the August 2026 rates for every lump sum paid in 2027; a four-month lookback uses September. April, May, June, July and August 2026 in sequence determine what 2027 participants see.
Work one case through both rate sets. A 65-year-old with a $3,000 monthly single-life benefit prices at roughly $460,000 under the rate set that would have anchored a 2026 window, against $438,000 on the April numbers. That is 4.8 percent off the payable amount, and it is the 417(e) floor doing the work, not the plan's own equivalence factors, which for virtually all large plans are not binding in this rate environment.
| Participant age | Monthly single-life benefit | Approx. 2026 rate-set lump sum | Approx. April 2026 rate-set lump sum | Reduction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 55 | $3,000 | $540,000 | $508,000 | -5.9% |
| 60 | $3,000 | $500,000 | $473,000 | -5.4% |
| 65 | $3,000 | $460,000 | $438,000 | -4.8% |
| 70 | $3,000 | $415,000 | $398,000 | -4.1% |
| 75 | $3,000 | $365,000 | $352,000 | -3.6% |
The age gradient is the part that changes program design. At 55 the same benefit reprices 5.9 percent lower; at 75, 3.6 percent. A parallel rise across all three segments compounds through a longer discounting horizon, so the deferred vested population, which is exactly the cohort most lump sum windows target first, absorbs the largest cut. A sponsor sizing a 2027 window off board materials written three months ago is carrying a cash outflow projection that is high by roughly a nickel on the dollar, and a headcount reduction projection that is optimistic for a different reason.
Why the Lower Outflow Does Not Land as a Saving
The reduction in payable value cuts the sponsor's closing outflow and cuts the election rate at the same time, and the second effect is the one that decides whether the window achieves anything.
Participants benchmark their lump sum against an informal comparison drawn from coworkers or a prior-year statement rather than against an actuarially equivalent annuity. When the figure slips by a perceptible percentage, the lump sum reads as a discount and the annuity reads as the retained-value option. The behavioral literature finds that quoting the lump sum as the commercial purchase price of a replacement annuity shifts elections toward the annuity by roughly 8 to 12 percentage points against a headline dollar presentation. Communication design is therefore not a rounding factor against a 4.8 percent repricing; it is the same order of magnitude.
A window that clears fewer deferred vested participants leaves a messier residual block for the buyout that usually follows it, which matters in a market that cleared roughly $55 billion of US volume in 2025. The Brookfield-Just close and the Milliman PFI April 2026 print covered the funded-ratio reversal that coincided with this rate move, and the two readings compound: smaller outflow, lower take rate, thinner funded-ratio cushion against the settlement charge.
The accounting basis then drifts away from the payment basis. The ASC 715 discount rate is a single effective rate reset at each measurement date; the 417(e) set is a three-segment structure fixed for the stability period. Both moved higher through Q1 2026 off the same corporate curve, but only one keeps moving during 2027, so the settlement charge a sponsor books diverges from the rate set governing the cash.
Plans carrying large accumulated other comprehensive income balances against the projected benefit obligation feel that gap most, and the 2026 retirement and pension actuarial outlook walks the adjacent balance-sheet mechanics. The PBGC variable-rate premium relief the window was meant to buy shrinks with the smaller settled amount.
Further Reading
- Brookfield-Just Close and the Milliman April 2026 PFI Print – The broader pension de-risking environment that frames 2026 and 2027 lump sum window design, including the first funded-ratio reversal in 12 months and the UK private-capital consolidation that reshapes cross-market PRT dynamics.
- Retirement and Pension Actuarial Outlook 2026 – The full 2026 corporate DB and public pension context, discount rate mechanics, and mortality assumption updates that intersect with 417(e) calculations.
- AG 55 First Filing Hits: What Life Actuaries Learned – The NAIC offshore reinsurance asset adequacy framework that shapes carrier pricing for pension buyouts following lump sum windows.
- NAIC Life RBC C-3 Field Test Targets New GOES Generator – The capital framework update that influences how PRT carriers report statutory capital on annuity blocks acquired in pension buyouts.
- Complex Assets Backing Insurance Reserves 2026 – The asset-side analysis of private credit and structured positions held by the carriers that write pension buyout business.
Sources
- IRS: Minimum Present Value Segment Rates (Section 417(e))
- IRS: Funding Yield Curve and Segment Rates
- IRS: Qualified Plan Regulatory Resources
- PBGC: Interest Rate Tables
- Milliman: 100 Pension Funding Index
- WTW: Pension Finance Watch and Retirement Insights
- Mercer: US Pension Market Updates
- Society of Actuaries: Retirement Research Library
- Treasury Regulations: 26 CFR Part 1 (Section 417(e) Regulations)
- American Academy of Actuaries: Pension Practice Council
- Aon: Retirement and Pension Risk Transfer Reports