| Lawyer4Audits.com |
| Defending and protecting businesses, financial professionals, and individuals from IRS audits, Insurance companies and Brokerage firms. |
Call: 516-938-5007
for Nationwide Assistance.
for Nationwide Assistance.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| Expert Advice Expert Service |
"lance wallach"
“abusive tax shelter
audit” "tax letter" "irs
letter" "irs letters"
"irs determination
letter" 419e 412i
6707a "form 8886"
"listed transactions"
"abusive tax shelter
assistance" "irs
penalty abatement"
"expert witness irs"
veba "expert witness
services" "expert
witness irs help"
"pension audit"
"Grist Mill Trust"
Benistar "SADI
Trust" "Beta 419"
"Millennium Plan"
Bisys "Creative
Services Group"
"Sterling Benefit
Plan" "Compass
419" Niche "Sea
Nine Veba" 419 412i
419e "expert witness
insurance" "welfare
benefit plans" "419
plan help" "expert
witness irs" “Lance
Wallach” “419 plan
help” “412i plan
help” “tax resolution
services” “irs
problem solvers”
“form 8886” 6707a
“irs letter” “abusive
tax shelters”
“abusive tax shelter”
“listed transactions”
“listed transaction”
“8886 help” “expert
witness” “insurance
expert” “tax expert”
“irs audit defense”
“abusive tax shelter
help” "tax letter" "irs
letter" "irs letters"
"irs determination
letter" 419e 412i
6707a "form 8886"
"listed transactions"
"abusive tax shelter
assistance" "irs
penalty abatement"
"expert witness irs"
veba "expert witness
services" "expert
witness irs help"
"pension audit"
“abusive tax shelter
help” “abusive tax
shelter assistance”
| Lawyer4Audits.com The Law Offices of Mark Levinson, Esq. 516-938-5007 |
California Broker, June 2011
Employee Retirement Plans
By Lance Wallach
412i, 419, Captive Insurance and Section 79 Plans;
Buyer Beware
The IRS has been attacking all 419 welfare benefit plans, many 412i retirement plans,
captive insurance plans with life insurance in them, and Section 79 plans. IRS is
aggressively auditing various plans and calling them “listed transactions,” “abusive tax
shelters,” or “reportable transactions,” participation in any of which must be disclosed to
the Service. The result has been IRS audits, disallowances, and huge fines for not
properly reporting under IRC 6707A.
In a recent tax court case, Curico v. Commissioner (TC Memo 2010-115), the Tax Court
ruled that an investment in an employee welfare benefit plan marketed under the name
“Benistar” was a listed transaction. It was substantially similar to the transaction
described in IRS Notice 95-34. A subsequent case, McGehee Family Clinic, largely
followed Curico, though it was technically decided on other grounds. The parties
stipulated to be bound by Curico regarding whether the amounts paid by McGehee in
connection with the Benistar 419 Plan and Trust were deductible. Curico did not appear
to have been decided yet at the time McGehee was argued. The McGehee opinion
(Case No. 10-102) (United States Tax Court, September 15, 2010) does contain an
exhaustive analysis and discussion of virtually all of the relevant issues.
Taxpayers and their representatives should be aware that the Service has disallowed
deductions for contributions to these arrangements. The IRS is cracking down on small
business owners who participate in tax reduction insurance plans and the brokers who
sold them. Some of these plans include defined benefit retirement plans, IRAs, or even
401(k) plans with life insurance.
In order to fully grasp the severity of the situation, you have to understand Notice 95-
34. It was issued in response to trust arrangements that were sold to companies
designed to provide deductible benefits, such as life insurance, disability and severance
pay benefits. The promoters of these arrangements claimed that all employer
contributions were tax-deductible when paid. They relied on the 10-or-more-employer
exemption from the IRC § 419 limits. They claimed that the permissible tax deductions
were unlimited in amount.
In general, contributions to a welfare benefit fund are not fully deductible when paid.
Sections 419 and 419A impose strict limits on the amount of tax-deductible prefunding
permitted for contributions to a welfare benefit fund. Section 419(A)(F)(6) provides an
exemption from Section 419 and Section 419A for certain “10-or-more-employers”
welfare benefit funds. In general, for this exemption to apply, the fund must have more
than one contributing employer of which no single employer can contribute more than
10% of the total contributions. Also, the plan must not be experience-rated with respect
to individual employers.
According to the Notice, these arrangements typically involve an investment in variable
life or universal life insurance contracts on the lives of the covered employees. The
problem is that the employer contributions are large relative to the cost of the amount of
term insurance that would be required to provide the death benefits under the
arrangement. Also, the trust administrator can cash in or withdraw the cash value of the
insurance policies to get cash to pay benefits other than death benefits. The plans are
often designed to determine an employer’s contributions or its employees’ benefits
based on a way that insulates the employer to a significant extent from the experience of
other subscribing employers. In general, the contributions and claimed tax deductions
tend to be disproportionate to the economic realities of the arrangements.
Benistar advertised that enrollees should expect the same type of tax benefits as listed
in the transaction described in Notice 95-34. The advertising packet listed the following
benefits of enrollment:
· Virtually unlimited deductions for the employer.
· Contributions could vary from year to year.
· Benefits could be provided to one or more key executives on a selective basis.
· No need to provide benefits to rank-and-file employees.
· Contributions to the plan were not limited by qualified plan rules and would not
interfere with pension, profit sharing or 401(k) plans.
· Funds inside the plan would accumulate tax-free.
· Beneficiaries could receive death proceeds free of both income tax and estate tax.
· The program could be arranged for tax-free distribution at a later date.
· Funds in the plan were secure from the hands of creditors.
The Court said that the Benistar Plan was factually similar to the plans described in
Notice 95-34 at all relevant times. In rendering its decision, the court heavily cited
Curico, in which the court also ruled in favor of the IRS. As noted in Curico, the
insurance policies, which were overwhelmingly variable or universal life policies, required
large contributions compared to the cost of the amount of term insurance that would be
required to provide the death benefits under the arrangement. The Benistar Plan
owned the insurance contracts.
Following Curico, the Court held that the contributions to Benistar were not deductible
under section 162(a) because participants could receive the value reflected in the
underlying insurance policies purchased by Benistar. This is despite the fact that
payment of benefits by Benistar seemed to be contingent upon an unanticipated event
(the death of the insured while employed). As long as plan participants were willing to
abide by Benistar’s distribution policies, there was never a reason to forfeit a policy to
the plan. In fact, in estimating life insurance rates, the taxpayers’ expert in Curico
assumed that there would be no forfeitures, even though he admitted that an insurance
company would generally assume a reasonable rate of policy lapses.
The McGehee Family Clinic had enrolled in the Benistar Plan in May 2001 andclaimed
deductions for contributions to it in 2002 and 2005. The returns did not include a Form
8886, Reportable Transaction Disclosure Statement, or similar disclosure.
The IRS disallowed the latter deduction and adjusted the 2005 return of shareholder
Robert Prosser and his wife to include the $50,000 payment to the plan. The IRS also
assessed tax deficiencies and the enhanced 30% penalty totaling almost $21,000
against the clinic and $21,000 against the Prossers. The court ruled that the Prossers
failed to prove a reasonable cause or good faith exception.
More You Should Know
· In recent years, some section 412(i) plans have been funded with life insurance
using face amounts in excess of the maximum death benefit a qualified plan is permitted
to pay. Ideally, the plan should limit the proceeds that could be paid as a death benefit
in the event of a participant’s death. Excess amounts would revert to the plan. Effective
February 13, 2004, the purchase of excessive life insurance in any plan is considered a
listed transaction if the face amount of the insurance exceeds the amount that can be
issued by $100,000 or more and the employer has deducted the premiums for the
insurance.
· By itself, a 412(i) plan is not a listed transaction; however, the IRS has a task force
auditing 412(i) plans.
· An employer has not engaged in a listed transaction simply because it is a 412(i)
plan.
· Just because a 412(i) plan was audited and sanctioned for certain items, does not
necessarily mean the plan engaged in a listed transaction. Some 412(i) plans have
been audited and sanctioned for issues not related to listed transactions.
Companies should carefully evaluate proposed investments in plans such as the
Benistar plan. The claimed deductions will not be available and penalties will be
assessed for lack of disclosure if the investment is similar to the investments described
in Notice 95-34. In addition, under IRC 6707A, IRS fines participants a large amount of
money for not properly disclosing their participation in listed, reportable, or similar
transactions; an issue that was not before the Tax Court in either Curico or McGehee.
The disclosure needs to be made for every year the participant is in a plan. The forms
need to be filed properly even for years that no contributions are made. I have received
numerous calls from participants who did disclose and still got fined because the forms
were not filled in properly. A plan administrator told me that he helps hundreds of his
participants file forms, and they all still received very large IRS fines for not filling in the
forms properly.
Lance Wallach is National society of Accountants Speaker of the Year and member of
the AICPA faculty of teaching professionals. He does expert witness testimony and has
never lost a case. Contact him at 516-938-5007, wallachinc@gmail.com, or visit www.
taxaudit419.com or www.lancewallach.com. The information provided herein is not
intended as legal, accounting, financial, or any other type of advice for any specific
individual or other entity. You should contact an appropriate professional for any such
advice.