Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Employer wants to reduce the deferred compensation benefit paid at termination of employment from $2.5M to $2M?  Is this permissible if we keep the same time and form of payment and the parties agree?  The 409A regulations (26 CFR 1.409A-1(c)(3)(vi)) envision that it is permissible to increase the benefit but I do not see any express approval of reducing the benefit.   

Posted

As long as there isn't anything that would compensate the participant for the reduction (which could be viewed as an acceleration of benefit), it shouldn't be an issue under 409A.

 - There are two types of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data sets...

Posted

You may want to review the substitution rule under 1.409A-3(f). In my experience, there is very rarely a voluntary relinquishment of deferred compensation without something else contemplated, either explicitly or implicitly. 

Posted
7 minutes ago, EBECatty said:

You may want to review the substitution rule under 1.409A-3(f). In my experience, there is very rarely a voluntary relinquishment of deferred compensation without something else contemplated, either explicitly or implicitly. 

Exactly! My gut feeling tells me that there is more going on here. My first question to the OP would be WHY is this executive relinquishing the deferred comp?

Posted

This is the rare case where the executive is not accepting anything in return for the reduction but is agreeing to it knowing the employer's financial limitations.  

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use