Westchester Plastic Surgical Associates, P.C. - Page 26




                                       - 26 -                                         

          mortgages; the trust invested in a tax-shelter partnership in               
          which one of the trustees acquired three loose diamonds, the                
          largest of which could not be located; and the plan disbursed               
          plan assets to nonparticipants without explanation.  We found               
          under those circumstances that the trust's investment practices             
          violated the exclusive benefit rule.  Accordingly, we upheld the            
          Commissioner's determination that the plan was no longer                    
          qualified.                                                                  
               In Shedco, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-295, the              
          trustee of an employer-sponsored defined benefit pension plan               
          lent $2,250,000, representing approximately 90 percent of the               
          plan's assets, through an unsecured loan to a construction                  
          company in which the trustee had served as executive vice                   
          president until his retirement.  The proceeds from the loan were            
          used for general working capital needs, and when the loan was               
          made, the construction company could have obtained funds from               
          several other sources.  The trustee did not consult with counsel            
          or with the plan's actuarial firm about making the loan before              
          the plan lent the money to the construction company.  The                   
          construction company agreed orally to make semiannual principal             
          payments on the note of $250,000 each.  It made two such                    
          payments, and it made monthly payments of interest in accordance            
          with the terms of the note until it encountered problems in                 
          Arizona's real estate economy.  The construction company's                  





Page:  Previous  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011