-35-
On August 12, 1974, the conference committee reported H.R. 2
and, in the Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the reported
legislative language, described the pertinent part of the
declaratory judgment provision as follows, H. Conf. Rept. 93-
1280, 259, 331 (1974), 1974-3 C.B. 415, 492:
Tax Court declaratory judgment proceedings
Both the House bill and the Senate amendment provide a
procedure for obtaining a declaratory judgment with respect
to the tax-qualified status of an employee benefit plan.
Under both the House and Senate versions of the bill,
jurisdiction to issue a declaratory judgment is given to the
United States Tax Court. This remedy is available only if
the Internal Revenue Service has issued a determination as
to the status of the plan which is adverse to the party
petitioning in the Tax Court, or has failed to issue a
determination but the petitioner has exhausted his
administrative remedies inside the Internal Revenue Service.
The differences between the bill as passed by both the
House and the Senate are technical in nature. For example,
the Senate amendment provides that the burden of proof is to
be on the petitioner (the employer, plan administrator, or
employee) as to those grounds set forth in the Internal
Revenue Service determination; the burden of proof is to be
on the Service as to any other grounds that the Service
relies upon in the court proceeding (e.g., if the Service
does not issue a determination as to the plan, then the
Service is to have the burden of proof as to every ground as
to which it relies). On the other hand, the House bill does
not make specific provisions for burden of proof.
Under the conference agreement, the House provision is
accepted with a number of amendments. The Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation is permitted to be a petitioner, on the
same basis as other petitioners. Employees are permitted to
be petitioners if they qualify as interested parties under
Treasury regulations and have exhausted their administrative
remedies. It is contemplated that only those employees who
are entitled to petition the Secretary of Labor under
section 3001 of this Act are to be treated as interested
parties. It is contemplated that the question as to who
bears the burden of proof will be determined by the Tax
Court under its existing rule-making authority. Under the
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011