- 5 -
valuation of the original plan and profit-sharing plan (the
profit-sharing plan) and to discuss the distribution owed to
petitioner, as petitioner was near retirement age. The options
reviewed by petitioner included his receiving a distribution from
the Plan as taxable income, rolling the benefits over into an
individual retirement account (IRA), or rolling the benefits over
into the profit-sharing plan. At this meeting, the individuals
present did not discuss the possibility of petitioner’s waiving
his vested plan benefits.
After the May 20, 1985, meeting, petitioner evaluated the
financial needs of GCI. Amid GCI’s decreasing customer base and
financial losses, petitioner thought that expansion was
necessary. Therefore, petitioner decided that it would be best
for GCI if petitioner waived his benefits under the Plan and had
the funds paid to GCI to provide the necessary working capital.
Between the meeting on May 20, 1985, and July 12, 1985, Mr.
Zdonek called Mr. Salisbury and asked Mr. Salisbury to research
the question of whether petitioner was permitted to waive his
Plan benefits. On July 12, 1985, Mr. Salisbury prepared a
memorandum to GCI’s pension file which memorialized a telephone
conversation between Mr. Salisbury and Juanita Nappier (Ms.
Nappier), a supervisor with the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.
(PBGC). Mr. Salisbury stated that Ms. Nappier believed that it
would be fine for petitioner to waive his benefits under the Plan
due to GCI’s business conditions, so long as the rank and file
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011