- 20 -
prohibited transaction between a plan and a disqualified
person.11
The close relationship between the Congress’ reaction to the
private foundations problems in TRA ‘69 and the employees plans
problems in ERISA ‘74 is evident in (1) the general structures of
sections 4941 (private foundations) and 4975 (employees plans)
and (2) the identity of many elements of the definitions of
“prohibited transaction” (sec. 4975(c)(1)) and “self-dealing”
(sec. 4941(d)(1)). The opening language of the definitions and
many of the elements in the definitions (subpars. (A), (B), (C),
and (E) of sec. 4941(d)(1) and subpars. (A), (B), (C), and (D) of
sec. 4975(c)(1)) are word-for-word identical. The ERISA ‘74
conference joint statement of managers confirms, at numerous
points, the TRA ‘69 private foundations origins of much of
section 4975. H. Conf. Rept. 93-1280 (1974), 1974-3 C.B. 415:
11 Sec. 4975(h) requires respondent to notify the Department
of Labor before issuing a notice of deficiency with respect to
taxes imposed by sec. 4975(a) or (b). Our findings include the
parties’ stipulations as to two such notifications. Sec. 4975(i)
is a cross-reference to coordination procedures under sec. 3003
of ERISA. Petitioner does not contend that the notification was
insufficient or that any action of the Department of Labor under
ERISA secs. 406 (relating to prohibited transactions), 408
(relating to exemptions from prohibited transactions), 3003
(relating to procedures in connection with prohibited
transactions), or 3004 (relating to coordination between the
Treasury Department and the Labor Department) affects the instant
case. See 29 U.S.C. 1106, 1108, 1203, 1204. Accordingly, we
assume that all requirements as to notification of, and
coordination with, the Labor Department have been complied with.
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011