- 11 - "balance to the credit" when he transferred from the Retirement System to the Pension System. Accordingly, petitioners are not entitled to the increased threshold amount, i.e., $750,000, set forth in section 4980A(c)(4) in determining the amount of petitioner's excess distributions for purposes of the excise tax under section 4980A. Because petitioner received a retirement distribution under section 4980A(e)(1) in the amount of $456,611, we sustain respondent's determination that petitioner received an excess retirement distribution in the amount of $306,611 ($456,611 less $150,000) and petitioner is therefore liable for the 15-percent excise tax under section 4980A. We have considered petitioners' remaining arguments regarding section 4980A and find them unpersuasive. Finally, we reject petitioners' claim of an overpayment of income tax because the Transfer Refund does not qualify for 10- year forward averaging under section 402(e)(1). The law is clear that if a distribution is not a "lump sum distribution" within the meaning of section 402(e)(4)(A), then such distribution does not qualify for forward averaging under section 402(e)(1). E.g., Clark v. Commissioner, 101 T.C. 215, 218-219 (1993). We have already held, supra at p. 10, that the Transfer Refund did not constitute a lump sum distribution because petitioner did not receive the "balance to the credit" when he transferred from thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011