The Tax Court has held in Scheiber v. Commissioner
(T.C. Memo 2017-32) that an individual’s interest in a pension plan was not an asset for purposes of determining the extent of his insolvency under Section 108(d).
The case involved an individual and his wife (the Scheibers) who incurred $418,596 of cancellation of debt (COD) income under Section 61(a)(12). The Scheibers took the position that a substantial amount of the COD income was excludable under Section 108(a)(1)(B) because they were insolvent immediately before the discharge under Section 108(d)(3). Under section 108(d)(3), the Scheibers computed their insolvency by the excess of their total liabilities over the fair market value of their assets.
Mr. Scheiber was retired and was entitled to receive monthly payments from a pension plan at the time of the discharge of indebtedness. The IRS took a contrary position that the Scheibers were not insolvent because they failed to include Mr. Scheiber’s interest in a pension plan as an asset. If Mr. Scheiber’s interest in the pension plan was included, the Scheibers would not be insolvent relevant to the discharge date.
The Court held that Mr. Scheiber’s interest in the pension plan was not an asset within the meaning of Section 108(d)(3). Specifically, the Court held that Mr. Scheiber’s pension plan interest was not an asset because:
- The pension plan interest entitled the Scheibers to only monthly payments.
- The interest could not be assigned.
- The interest could not be borrowed against.
- The Scheibers could not borrow from the plan.
Partner, Washington National Tax Office
+1 202 521 1532
Tax professional standards statement
This content supports Grant Thornton LLP’s marketing of professional services and is not written tax advice directed at the particular facts and circumstances of any person. If you are interested in the topics presented herein, we encourage you to contact us or an independent tax professional to discuss their potential application to your particular situation. Nothing herein shall be construed as imposing a limitation on any person from disclosing the tax treatment or tax structure of any matter addressed herein. To the extent this content may be considered to contain written tax advice, any written advice contained in, forwarded with or attached to this content is not intended by Grant Thornton LLP to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code.
The information contained herein is general in nature and is based on authorities that are subject to change. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal or tax advice provided by Grant Thornton LLP to the reader. This material may not be applicable to, or suitable for, the reader’s specific circumstances or needs and may require consideration of tax and nontax factors not described herein. Contact Grant Thornton LLP or other tax professionals prior to taking any action based upon this information. Changes in tax laws or other factors could affect, on a prospective or retroactive basis, the information contained herein; Grant Thornton LLP assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any such changes. All references to “Section,” “Sec.,” or “§” refer to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.