k man
Sep 1 2004, 03:29 PM
Small plan (the only participant currently is the owner). the owner would like to invest plan assets in a closely held bank and he will be a director of that bank. is this a PT? i think it is a transaction with a party in interest. however, an investment is not a sale or exchange so i have some doubt.
k man
Sep 15 2004, 03:20 PM
anyone have anything?
rcline46
Sep 15 2004, 04:35 PM
Is he becoming a director because of his investment? Then that rises to self-dealing, or benefitting from the assets and smells like a PT. Why doesn't he pay for a legal opinion? Or are you an attorney.
If not an attorney tell him you can't give a legal opinion, but it smells bad and he had better get a legal opinion.
GBurns
Sep 15 2004, 06:54 PM
It smells and as suggested needs competent legal advice.
The bank is closely held.. is he a shareholder? Is he related? Does he have some other relationship with either the bank or its shareholders?
You posted that "he will be a director of that bank", which I read as being that he is not currently but will become. After the investment? Why? Because of the investment?
Is this closely held bank something that a prudent fiduciary would invest in? Very questionable since being a closely held bank, it might have severe restrictions on the sale or disposition of shares, thereby limiting liquidity etc.
mbozek
Sep 16 2004, 05:18 PM
I think you have do a review of whether the owner's position as a director makes him a disqualified person within the meaning of IRC 4975(e)(2)(H) - will he own at least 50% of the stock of the bank?
k man
Sep 17 2004, 08:26 AM
mbozek, i have interpreted this matter similarly to you. the key issue seems to be whether he will hold greater than 50% interest in the bank. with regard to one of the other comments, after the investment he will own stock. the fact that the bank is closely held is immaterial.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.