- 14 -
benefit of a single employee); sec. 1.105-5(a), Income Tax Regs.
So long as the participant has notice or knowledge of the plan,
there is no requirement that it be in writing or that an
employee’s rights under the plan be enforceable. See Wigutow v.
Commissioner, supra.
The daycare accident and health plan is detailed in Mrs.
Speltz’s “client data sheet,” which states that the medical
benefits plan would be effective in March 2000, that employees
were eligible to receive up to $6,500 a year in reimbursements,
and that employees had to work a minimum of 12.5 hours a week to
be eligible to receive benefits. On these facts, we find that
the daycare established a proper accident and health plan.
Whether Mr. Speltz Had Notice or Knowledge of the Plan
Respondent also argues that notice or knowledge of the plan
was not reasonably available to Mr. Speltz. We disagree. Mr.
Speltz signed a document indicating that his salary would be in
the form of reimbursements for insurance premiums and medical
expenses up to $6,500 a year, he credibly testified that he had
knowledge of the accident and health plan, and most importantly,
Mr. Speltz used the plan. See id. (a taxpayer’s signing the
document declaring the plan is evidence that the taxpayer had
knowledge of the plan); see also Charles Schneider & Co. v.
Commissioner, 500 F.2d 148, 155 (8th Cir. 1974) (the Court is the
exclusive judge of the credibility of the witnesses in making its
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011