Determination Letter 201624024 Released June 10, 2016 Approved Transcribed from scan

A plan received a five-year funding amortization extension

Apply this to your situation

This page covers one taxpayer's ruling from 2016, which can't be cited as precedent. Ezel answers your situation under the current Code and IRS guidance, with citations.

Currency note: this determination was released in 2016
Statutory amendments, regulation changes, court decisions, or later IRS guidance may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current tax advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or position mentioned here.
Not precedent. Under 26 U.S.C. § 6110(k)(3), this written determination may not be used or cited as precedent. It resolved one taxpayer's situation on its specific facts, and identifying details were redacted by the IRS before release. The official IRS release (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source.
About this page: The plain-English summary and ruling snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official IRS release. The full text is the IRS's own document.
Transcribed from a scanned original: the IRS released this determination as an image-only PDF. The full text below is a machine transcription, proofread against the scan. Check the original PDF before quoting exact language.
View official IRS release (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A multiemployer pension plan requested a five-year extension for amortizing specified unfunded liabilities beginning with its July 1, 2014 plan year. Its actuary certified that without the extension the plan would have an accumulated funding deficiency in the current or one of the next nine plan years. The plan sponsor had adopted a funding-improvement plan, the plan was projected to have enough assets to pay expected benefits and expenses during the extended period, and the required notice had been provided. The IRS approved the extension under section 431(d)(1) for the eligible amortization charge bases identified in the application. It expected the plan's actuarial assumptions and methods to be reviewed and updated as appropriate.

Ruling snapshot

  • Question: Did the plan qualify for a five-year extension of the amortization periods for its eligible unfunded liabilities?
  • Outcome: Approved, effective for the plan year beginning July 1, 2014
  • Key authorities: IRC § 431(b)(2)(B), (b)(4), and (d)(1); ERISA § 304

Full text (IRS public release)

Significant Index Number 0431.00-00

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20224

TAX EXEMPT AND
GOVERNMENT ENTITIES                         MAR 17 2016
DIVISION

SE:T:EP:RA:A2

Re:

(Plan No.          ) (“Plan”)
EIN:        -

Taxpayer =

Dear                         :

This letter constitutes notice that approval has been granted for your request for
a 5-year automatic extension for amortizing the unfunded liabilities as of
July 1, 2014, for the above-named Plan which are described in sections
431(b)(2)(B) and 431(b)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), and sections
304(b)(2)(B) and 304(b)(4) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974 (“ERISA”). This extension is effective with the plan year beginning
July 1, 2014. This extension applies to the eligible amortization charge bases as
identified in your application submission, established as of July 1, 2014.

The extension of the amortization periods of the unfunded liabilities of the Plan
was granted in accordance with section 431(d)(1) of the Code. Section
431(d)(1)(A) of the Code requires the Secretary to extend the period of time
required to amortize any unfunded liability of a plan for a period of time (not in
excess of 5 years) if the Plan submits an application meeting the criteria stated in
section 431(d)(1)(B). The plan has submitted the required information to meet
the criteria in section 431(d)(1)(B), including a certification from the plan’s actuary
that:

(i) absent the extension under subparagraph (A), the
    plan would have an accumulated funding deficiency in the
    current plan year or any of the 9 succeeding plan years,

201624024

2

(ii) the plan sponsor has adopted a plan to improve the
     plan’s funding status,

(iii) the plan is projected to have sufficient assets to
      timely pay expected benefits and anticipated expenditures
      over the amortization period as extended, and

(iv) the notice required under paragraph (3)(A) has been
     provided.

In granting this ruling, it is expected that the Plan’s assumptions and methods will
be reviewed and updated as appropriate so that each prescribed assumption
was applied in accordance with applicable law and regulations. And each other
assumption is reasonable (taking into account the experience of the plan and
reasonable expectations) and such other assumptions, in combination, offer the
best estimate of anticipated experience under the plan. In addition, we are not
expressing any opinion as to the accuracy of any material submitted with your
request.

We have sent a copy of this letter to the Manager, EP Classification in Baltimore,
Maryland, to the Manager, EP Compliance Unit in Chicago, Illinois, and to your
authorized representative pursuant to a power of attorney on file in this office.

This ruling is directed only to the taxpayer that requested it. Section 6110(k)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code provides that it may not be used or cited by others
as precedent.

If you require further assistance in this matter, please contact Mr.
(ID#                 ) at (              )        -        .

Sincerely yours,

David M. Ziegler
Manager, EP Actuarial Group 2

cc:

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what the IRS ruled for one taxpayer in 2016, and it can't be cited as precedent. Ezel checks the current Internal Revenue Code and IRS guidance and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.