Michael Morrissey - Page 13

                                       - 13 -                                         

            508 U.S. at 160 (citing S. Rept. 93-383, supra at 95-96, 1974-3           
            C.B. (Supp.) at 174-175).  Before ERISA, a transfer of property           
            to a pension plan either to satisfy a funding obligation or to            
            repay a loan presented the potential for abuse.  The transferor           
            could transfer nonliquid assets to the plan, or he or she could           
            otherwise "sell" the assets to the plan at a price that was not           
            indicative of their true worth.  Id.  By adding section 4975 to           
            the Code, the Congress endeavored to bar any transfer of                  
            property in payment of a transferor's obligation to his or her            
            plan.  Id.                                                                
                 The type of abusive property transfer that the Congress              
            was concerned about appears to be present in the instant case,            
            where petitioner transferred a nonliquid asset to the MPP, and            
            the transfer was most likely injurious to the MPP.  The benefit           
            that the MPP would have enjoyed from a cash repayment of the              
            loan far exceeded any benefit that it received upon receipt of            
            the property.  The MPP and the DBP are separate entities, and             
            the fact that petitioner transferred the real estate only to              
            the MPP means that the MPP now owes him an amount equal to the            
            real estate value that exceeded his debt to the MPP before the            
            transfer.  Following the transfer, the MPP had minimal assets,            
            but for the real estate, and, in order to restore its position            
            and satisfy its obligation to petitioner, the MPP was required            
            to convert the real estate into cash.  Such a conversion is               





Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011