Everett Moreland Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 The proposed 409A regulations state that "common law doctrines continue to apply to any such election" to change payment dates under Notice 2005-1, Q&A-19©. Notice 2007-86 extends through 2008 a participant's ability to elect a new payment date for payments due after 2008. Question: If an account balance plan now provides for only one payment option, which is 60 monthly installments after separation, is there a constructive receipt problem with the employer allowing a current employee to elect in November 2008 to receive either a lump sum in 2009 or three annual installments in 2009-2011? I don't see the constructive receipt issue. I am familiar with the Martin case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now