- 14 -
no difference whether he had 2 or 33 years of service with State
Farm for purposes of computing his termination payments. If he
had received no commissions during the last 12 months, then he
would not have been entitled to any termination payments.
The termination payments were linked to the amount of
commissions paid to petitioner during the 12 months immediately
preceding the termination. The amount was unaffected by
petitioner's income during any prior period, by the total number
of policies written over his career with State Farm, or by the
total time period he served as a State Farm agent. No matter how
long he had been a State Farm agent, petitioner's termination
payments would be based only on his compensation for the last 12
months. Unlike deferred compensation, petitioner had no vested
right to payment of any particular funds or any specific amount
until the termination and unless he complied with the conditions
of the Agreement to return property to State Farm and to refrain
from competition.
Consequently, we conclude that the termination payments
received by petitioner were not deferred compensation derived
from self-employment and that our prior conclusion in Milligan v.
Commissioner, supra, was incorrect. See also Darden v.
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., supra, where the Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that an Extended Earnings
Plan providing for similar payments was not a pension plan
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011