- 37 -
(equal to the normal cost computed under the aggregate cost method)
which may be included as a component of the account limit, together
with the amounts set aside for incurred but unpaid claims.
Respondent concludes, therefore, that section 419A(c)(2) does not
require the computation of the accrued liability.
A comparison of the language in section 419A(c)(1) with that
in section 419A(c)(2) belies respondent’s position. Section
419A(c)(1) provides that the account limit “for any taxable year is
the amount reasonably and actuarially necessary to fund” (emphasis
supplied) incurred but unpaid claims and administrative costs with
respect to such claims. By contrast, section 419A(c)(2) provides
that the account limit “for any taxable year may include a
reserve”.
Congress could have used identical language in both
provisions; the fact that Congress chose not to do so must be given
heed. Cf. Keene Corp. v. United States, 508 U.S. 200, 208 (1993)
(“Where Congress includes particular language in one section of a
statute but omits it in another * * *, it is generally presumed
that Congress acts intentionally and purposely in the disparate
inclusion or exclusion.” (Internal quotation marks and citation
omitted.)); United States v. $359,500 in U.S. Currency, 828 F.2d
930, 933 (2d Cir. 1987) (“‘contrasting language in similar statutes
may show that the legislature intended different standards of
compliance’” (quoting 2A Singer, Sutherland Statutory Construction,
Page: Previous 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011