- 8 - analysis of the issue in Romann v. Commissioner, supra, we conclude that the controlling regulation is valid.4 In Romann v. Commissioner, supra at 288, we stated: the Congress entrusted the Treasury Department with the specific task of writing interested party regulations. The Treasury Department has done so. As our analysis, supra, shows, in most instances only present employees of one sort or another can qualify as interested parties under the regulations. In the case of plan terminations, the focus shifts to certain former employees and beneficiaries of deceased former employees. Perhaps the objectives sought to be furthered by ERISA would have been better served if the Treasury Department had issued regulations more in line with petitioner's suggestion. However, ERISA does not require the Treasury Department to do so, whether we focus merely on the enacted words or take into account the legislative history in order to understand the enacted words. Under these circumstances, we shall not rewrite the authorized regulations to meet petitioner's concerns. See Newborn v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 610, 636-637 (1990). See Jablonski v. Commissioner, supra. Consistent with the preceding discussion, we hold that petitioners are not interested parties within the meaning of section 1.7476-1(b), Income Tax Regs. Therefore, we shall grant respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. To reflect the foregoing, An order granting respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction will be entered. 4 The Court's opinion in Romann v. Commissioner, 111 T.C. 273 (1998), includes an appendix comprising a detailed summary of the legislative history underlying sec. 7476.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Last modified: May 25, 2011