- 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 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011