- 5 -
authority to apply equitable principles to assume jurisdiction
over a matter not authorized by statute. See Odend'hal v.
Commissioner, 95 T.C. 617, 624 (1990), and cases cited therein.
We must decide whether we have jurisdiction to make a
declaratory judgment as to the qualification of the Plan under
section 401(a). Before the passage of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), Pub. L. 93-406, 88 Stat.
829, we would have had to answer this question "no". Before
ERISA, we were not authorized to grant a declaratory judgment
concerning respondent's determination that an employer's pension
plan failed to qualify under section 401(a). H. Rept. 93-807, at
106 (1974), 1974-3 C.B. (Supp.) 236, 341. Instead, the employer
under the then-existing law could seek judicial review of
respondent's action after the employer made contributions to its
plan, claimed the contributions as a deduction on its Federal
income tax return, and had those deductions disallowed by the
Internal Revenue Service. Id.
In 1974, the Congress enacted ERISA to deal with a number of
matters affecting retirement plans, one matter of which was the
unavailability of a judicial forum to grant a declaratory
judgment with respect to the initial or continuing qualification
of retirement plans. H. Rept. 93-807, supra at 6, 1974-3 C.B.
(Supp.) at 241. As part of ERISA, the Congress enacted section
7476 to establish a declaratory judgment procedure under which an
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011