- 12 -
Respondent, of course, urges us to adhere to that conclusion.
But we are no longer inclined to do so because we now think such
payments are not deferred compensation.
In a typical deferred compensation arrangement, an employee
wants to postpone receiving a portion of the income to which he
or she is entitled with the understanding that the income will be
paid at a later time, usually upon retirement or other
termination. Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris, 463 U.S.
1073, 1076 (1983); Minor v. United States, 772 F.2d 1472 (9th
Cir. 1985). In these cases the employee chose to receive less
than his or her agreed compensation when earned with the
understanding that it would be paid out at some later time. The
employer ordinarily contributes the amount designated by the
employee to a fund established for that purpose.
To be sure, deferred compensation arrangements often exist
with respect to insurance agents operating as independent
contractors. Such a plan was discussed in Petr v. Nationwide
Mut. Ins. Co., 712 F.Supp. 504 (D. Md. 1989). In that case,
which involved a Nationwide plan, the insurance company "credited
to an account maintained over the years for * * * [the agent] a
percentage of * * * [the agent's] earnings based on his original
and renewal fees for insurance policies." Id. at 505. The same
plan was at issue in Darden v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 922 F.2d
203 (4th Cir. 1991), revd. on other grounds 503 U.S. 318 (1992).
In that case the deferred compensation plan was funded by the
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011