- 11 - Therefore, he in effect repaid the loan out of his pension plan account. If the loan proceeds were taxed when first received by petitioner, taxing them at the time of the gross distribution would lead to double taxation of the same funds, a result generally to be avoided. See Campbell v. Commissioner, 108 T.C. 54, 67-68 (1997). However, petitioners are required to show that the loan proceeds were taxed when first received in order to avoid taxation at the time they were offset against the gross distribution, and they have not done so. Petitioners make no allegation or argument that the loan proceeds were taxed when first received, and the available evidence suggests otherwise. First of all, petitioner received a statement from the plan with respect to the gross distribution that indicated that the $9,109.93 loan proceeds would be included in the gross distribution for purposes of taxable income. Thus, the plan administrators believed, and so advised petitioner, that the loan proceeds were includable in income. Moreover, it appears that the loan to petitioner was not income when received because it was a loan of $10,000 or less. In general a loan from a qualified plan to a plan participant is treated as a distribution from the plan under section 72(p)(1), and therefore included in income under section 72. See sec. 402(a). However, section 72(p)(2)(A) provides an exception to the general rule for certain loans, and petitioner's loan appearsPage: 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