The IRS and Treasury have issued major warnings about abusive 419 Plans! We've been warning about them for some time.



Under § 419A(c)(2)(A), the reserve for post-retirement medical benefits is further limited by the requirement that it be determined on the basis of current medical costs. In addition, for post-retirement life insurance the maximum insurance coverage that can be taken into account with respect to any covered employee is $50,000 of coverage. Moreover, in the case of post-retirement benefits for or on behalf of a key employee (as defined in § 416(i)(1)), § 419A(d) requires that a separate account be established for any medical or life insurance benefits provided with respect to the key employee, and any medical or life insurance benefits provided with respect to the key employee after retirement may only be paid from the separate account. Under § 419A(e)(1), in order for
reserves for post-retirement medical and life insurance benefits to be taken into account the plan must meet the nondiscrimination requirements of § 505(b) with respect to those benefits (even if those requirements do not otherwise apply to the plan).
A plan meets the nondiscrimination requirements of § 505(b) only if (i) each class of benefits under the plan is provided under a classification of employees which is set forth in the plan and which is found by the Secretary not to be discriminatory in favor of employees who are highly compensated individuals, and (ii) in the case of each class of benefits, such benefits do not discriminate in favor of employees who are highly compensated individuals. Under § 505(b)(3), in the case of any benefit for which another section of the Code provides nondiscrimination rules (e.g., § 105(h) in the case of a self insured medical reimbursement plan), those rules apply instead with respect to the benefit. Under §§ 105(h)(8) and 414(t), all employees who are treated as
employed by a single employer under the rules of § 414(b), (c), or (m) are treated as employed by a single employer for purposes of §§ 105(h), 79, and 505. Sections 104(a)(3) and 105(b),(c), and (d) exclude from gross income certain amounts received by an employee through accident and health insurance. Section 105(e) provides that for purposes of §§ 104 and 105, amounts received through an “accident and health plan for employees” are treated as amounts received through accident or health insurance. Thus, the plan must exist primarily for the benefit of employees, as opposed to shareholders. See, e.g., Larkin v. Commissioner, 48 T.C. 629 (1967), aff’d, 394 F.2d 494 (1st Cir. 1968) (holding that the plan was merely a device to use corporate earnings to meet the anticipated medical needs of the shareholders).
Section 4976(a) imposes on an employer an excise tax in the amount of 100 percent of the amount of any disqualified benefit provided with respect to a welfare benefit fund maintained by the employer. Under § 4976(b)(1), a “disqualified benefit” means (i) any post-retirement medical benefit or life insurance benefit provided with respect to a key employee if a separate account is required to be established for the key employee under § 419A(d) 

4 comments:

  1. IRS Logo
    Subscriptions
    Language
    Information For...
    Advanced
    Filing
    Payments
    Refunds
    Credits & Deductions
    News & Events
    Forms & Pubs
    Help & Resources
    for Tax Pros
    News Essentials
    What's Hot
    News Releases
    IRS - The Basics
    IRS Guidance
    Media Contacts
    Facts & Figures
    Problem Alerts
    Around the Nation
    e-News Subscriptions
    The Newsroom Topics
    Multimedia Center
    Noticias en EspaƱol
    Radio PSAs
    Tax Scams
    The Tax Gap
    Fact Sheets
    IRS Tax Tips
    Armed Forces
    Latest News Home

    Like Share Print
    2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative
    Due to the potential impact of Hurricane Irene, the IRS on Aug. 26 extended the due date for offshore voluntary disclosure initiative (OVDI) requests until Sept. 9, 2011. On Aug. 29, the IRS further clarified that the Sept. 9 extension also applied to taxpayers filing delinquent FBARs pursuant to questions 17 and 18 in the questions and answers.
    Taxpayers seeking to participate in the OVDI needed to take the following actions by Sept. 9, 2011:
    Identifying information needed to be submitted to the Criminal Investigation office. This includes name, address, date of birth and Social Security number and as much of the other information requested in the Offshore Voluntary Disclosures Letter as possible. This information needed to be sent to:
    Internal Revenue Service
    Criminal Investigation
    ATTN: Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Coordinator
    Philadelphia Lead Development Center
    1-D04-100
    2970 Market Street
    Philadelphia, PA 19104
    A request for a 90-day extension for submitting the complete voluntary disclosure package of information to the Austin campus could be submitted. This request needed to be sent to:
    Internal Revenue Service
    3651 S. I H 35 Stop 4301 AUSC
    Austin, TX 78741
    ATTN: 2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative
    The questions and answers were updated as follows:
    Q24.1: What if I cannot complete my Offshore Voluntary Disclosures Letter and send it to CI on or before the deadline?
    * "The CPA's Guide to Life Insurance" by
    Bisk CPEasy

    * Avoiding Circular 230 Malpractice Traps
    and Common Abusive Small Businesss Hot
    spots by the AICPA, author/moderator
    Lance Wallach
    View my complete profile

    ReplyDelete
  2. www.lancewallach.com
    Abusive Tax Shelters
    412i, 419e plans litigation and IRS Audit Experts for abusive insurance based plans deemed reportable or listed transactions by the IRS.

    Saturday, May 5, 2012

    The IRS and Treasury have issued major warnings about abusive 419 Plans! We've been warning about them for some time.


    Under § 419A(c)(2)(A), the reserve for post-retirement medical benefits is
    further limited by the requirement that it be determined on the basis of current
    medical costs. In addition, for post-retirement life insurance the maximum
    insurance coverage that can be taken into account with respect to any covered
    employee is $50,000 of coverage. Moreover, in the case of post-retirement
    benefits for or on behalf of a key employee (as defined in § 416(i)(1)), § 419A(d)
    requires that a separate account be established for any medical or life insurance
    benefits provided with respect to the key employee, and any medical or life
    insurance benefits provided with respect to the key employee after retirement
    may only be paid from the separate account. Under § 419A(e)(1), in order for
    reserves for post-retirement medical and life insurance benefits to be taken into
    account the plan must meet the nondiscrimination requirements of § 505(b) with
    respect to those benefits (even if those requirements do not otherwise apply to
    the plan).
    A plan meets the nondiscrimination requirements of § 505(b) only if (i)
    each class of benefits under the plan is provided under a classification of
    employees which is set forth in the plan and which is found b

    ReplyDelete
  3. Abusive Tax Shelters
    412i, 419e plans litigation and IRS Audit Experts for abusive insurance based plans deemed reportable or listed transactions by the IRS.

    Saturday, May 5, 2012

    The IRS and Treasury have issued major warnings about abusive 419 Plans! We've been warning about them for some time.


    Under § 419A(c)(2)(A), the reserve for post-retirement medical benefits is
    further limited by the requirement that it be determined on the basis of current
    medical costs. In addition, for post-retirement life insurance the maximum
    insurance coverage that can be taken into account with respect to any covered
    employee is $50,000 of coverage. Moreover, in the case of post-retirement
    benefits for or on behalf of a key employee (as defined in § 416(i)(1)), § 419A(d)
    requires that a separate account be established for any medical or life insurance
    benefits provided with respect to the key employee, and any medical or life
    insurance benefits provided with respect to the key employee after retirement
    may only be paid from the separate account. Under § 419A(e)(1), in order for
    reserves for post-retirement medical and life insurance benefits to be taken into
    account the plan must meet the nondiscrimination requirements of § 505(b) with
    respect to those benefits (even if those requirements do not otherwise apply to
    the plan).
    A plan meets the nondiscrimination requirements of § 505(b) only if (i)
    each class of benefits under the plan is provided under a classification of
    employees which is set forth in the plan and which is found by the Secretary not
    to be discriminatory in favor of employees who are highly compensated
    individuals, and (ii) in the case of each class of benefits, such benefits do not
    discriminate in favor of employees who are highly compensated individuals.
    Under § 505(b)(3), in the case of any benefit for which another section of the
    Code provides nondiscrimination rules (e.g., § 105(h) in the case of a selfinsured
    medical reimbursement plan), those rules apply instead with respect to
    the benefit. Under §§ 105(h)(8) and 414(t), all employees who are treated as
    employed by a single employer under the rules of § 414(b), (c), or (m) are treated
    as employed by a single employer for purposes of §§ 105(h), 79, and 505.
    Sections 104(a)(3) and 105(b),(c), and (d) exclude from gross income

    www.lancewallach.com

    ReplyDelete
  4. IRS Tax Shelters & 419 Plans Litigation
    412i, 419e plans litigation and IRS Audit Experts for abusive insurance based plans deemed reportable or listed transactions by the IRS.

    Thursday, December 29, 2011

    Small Business Retirement Plans Fuel Litigation
    Maryland Trial Lawyer
    Dolan Media Newswires January


    Small businesses facing audits and potentially huge tax penalties over certain types of retirement plans are filing lawsuits against those who marketed, designed and sold the plans. The 412(i) and 419(e) plans were marketed in the past several years as a way for small business owners to set up retirement or welfare benefits plans while leveraging huge tax savings, but the IRS put them on a list of abusive tax shelters and has more recently focused audits on them.
    The penalties for such transactions are extremely high and can pile up quickly.
    There are business owners who owe taxes but have been assessed 2 million in penalties. The existing cases involve many types of businesses, including doctors’ offices, dental practices, grocery store owners, mortgage companies and restaurant owners. Some are trying to negotiate with the IRS. Others are not waiting. A class action has been filed and cases in several states are ongoing. The business owners claim that they were targeted by insurance companies; and their agents to purchase the plans without any disclosure that the IRS viewed the plans as abusive tax shelters. Other defendants include financial advisors who recommended the plans, accountants who failed to fill out required tax forms and law firms that drafted opinion letters legitimizing the plans, which were used as marketing tools.
    A 412(i) plan is a form of defined benefit pension plan. A 419(e) plan is a similar type of health and benefits plan. Typically, these were sold to small, privately held businesses with fewer than 20 employees and several million dollars in gross revenues. What distinguished a legitimate plan from the plans at issue were the life insurance policies used to fund them. The employer would make large cash contributions in the form of insurance premiums, deducting the entire amounts. The insurance policy was designed to have a “springing cash value,” meaning that for the first 5-7 years it would have a near-zero cash value, and then spring up in value.
    Just before it sprung, the owner would purchase the policy from the trust at the low cash value, thus making a tax-free transaction. After the cash value shot up, the owner could take tax-free loans against it. Meanwhile, the insurance agents collected exorbitant commissions on the premiums – 80 to 110 percent of the first year’s premium, which could exceed million.

    ReplyDelete