29 U.S.C. § 1345

Recapture of payments

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 29 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Authorization to recover benefits

Except as provided in subsection (c), the trustee is authorized to recover for the benefit of a plan from a participant the recoverable amount (as defined in subsection (b)) of all payments from the plan to him which commenced within the 3-year period immediately preceding the time the plan is terminated.

(b) Recoverable amountFor purposes of subsection (a) the recoverable amount is the excess of the amount determined under paragraph (1) over the amount determined under paragraph (2).(1) The amount determined under this paragraph is the sum of the amount of the actual payments received by the participant within the 3-year period.(2) The amount determined under this paragraph is the sum of—(A) the sum of the amount such participant would have received during each consecutive 12-month period within the 3 years if the participant received the benefit in the form described in paragraph (3),(B) the sum for each of the consecutive 12-month periods of the lesser of—(i) the excess, if any, of $10,000 over the benefit in the form described in paragraph (3), or(ii) the excess of the actual payment, if any, over the benefit in the form described in paragraph (3), and(C) the present value at the time of termination of the participant’s future benefits guaranteed under this subchapter as if the benefits commenced in the form described in paragraph (3).(3) The form of benefit for purposes of this subsection shall be the monthly benefit the participant would have received during the consecutive 12-month period, if he had elected at the time of the first payment made during the 3-year period, to receive his interest in the plan as a monthly benefit in the form of a life annuity commencing at the time of such first payment.(c) Payments made on or after death or disability of participant; waiver of recovery in case of hardship(1) In the event of a distribution described in section 1343(b)(7) 11 See References in Text note below. of this title the 3-year period referred to in subsection (b) shall not end sooner than the date on which the corporation is notified of the distribution.(2) The trustee shall not recover any payment made from a plan after or on account of the death of a participant, or to a participant who is disabled (within the meaning of section 72(m)(7) of title 26).(3) The corporation is authorized to waive, in whole or in part, the recovery of any amount which the trustee is authorized to recover for the benefit of a plan under this section in any case in which it determines that substantial economic hardship would result to the participant or his beneficiaries from whom such amount is recoverable.(Pub. L. 93–406, title IV, § 4045, Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 1027; Pub. L. 101–239, title VII, § 7891(a)(1), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2445.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 1343(b)(7) of this title, referred to in subsec. (c)(1), was redesignated section 1343(c)(7) of this title by Pub. L. 103–465, title VII, § 771(b), Dec. 8, 1994, 108 Stat. 5042.

Amendments

1989—Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 101–239 substituted “Internal Revenue Code of 1986” for “Internal Revenue Code of 1954”, which for purposes of codification was translated as “title 26” thus requiring no change in text.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1989 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 101–239 effective, except as otherwise provided, as if included in the provision of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99–514, to which such amendment relates, see section 7891(f) of Pub. L. 101–239, set out as a note under section 1002 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases, 1980–2020 · leading case: Davis v. Pension Benefit Guar. Corp., 864 F. Supp. 2d 148 (D.D.C. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Davis v. Pension Benefit Guar. Corp., 864 F. Supp. 2d 148 (D.D.C. 2012). · cites it 3× “PBGC contends that it is clearly authorized to collect post-termination overpayments from Plan participants and that its authority to collect those amounts is not governed by the restrictions contained in 29 U.S.C. § 1345 , which, it argues, applies only to the collection of…”

Walter I. Bechtel v. Pension Benefit Guar. Corp., 781 F.2d 906 (D.C. Cir. 1986). · cites it 2× “The appellant argues that because Congress expressly provided in ERISA for re-coupment by a plan trustee in one specified instance (pertaining to certain preferential payments made prior to a plan’s termination date, 29 U.S.C. § 1345 ) — not covering this case — it did not…”

Pineiro v. Pension Benefit Guar. Corp., 318 F. Supp. 2d 67 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). “Since terminating a plan usually involves allocating assets that are insufficient to cover the plan’s benefit obligations, the trustee is explicitly authorized to take a number of actions that might otherwise violate its fiduciary duties, such as recovering benefits paid to…”

Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. Heppenstall Co., 633 F.2d 293 (3rd Cir. 1980). · cites it 2× “29 U.S.C. § 1345 (1976). Finally, if an employer has not elected to insure its contingent liability, the amount which PBGC can recover pursuant to 29 U.”

Braniff Int'l Corp. v. Interfirst Bank, Dallas, N.A. (In Re Braniff Airways, Inc.), 24 B.R. 466 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1982). “Indeed, the court carefully took notice of this fact in saying The termination date affects retirees only to the extent that the payments guaranteed under ERISA are less than they are currently receiving, or to the extent that benefits already received may be recaptured under 29…”

Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. Maryland Glass Corp., 618 F. Supp. 1410 (D. Maryland 1985). ““The termination date affects retirees only to the extent that the payments guaranteed under ERISA [may be] less than they are currently receiving, or to the extent that benefits already received may be recaptured under 29 U.S.C. § 1345 .” Id. As of January 1, 1979, of the 493…”

Pension Comm. for Farmstead Foods Pension Plan for Albert Lea Hourly Employees v. Pension Benefit Guar. Corp., 778 F. Supp. 1020 (D. Minnesota 1991). “An earlier termination date might reduce the amount of the payments retirees currently receive or some benefits already received may be recaptured under 29 U.S.C. § 1345 . Maryland Glass Corp., 618 F.”

Braniff Airways, Inc. v. Interfirst Bank, Dallas, N.A. (In Re Braniff Airways, Inc.), 22 B.R. 1001 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1982). “Under 29 U.S.C. § 1345 , the trustee of a terminated plan is entitled to recoup certain overpayments within the three-year period immediately preceding the time the plan terminated.”

Hous. Auth. of the Cnty. of King v. Pierce, 701 F. Supp. 844 (D.D.C. 1988). “The employees in Bechtel challenged the PBGC’s authority to undertake the recoupment scheme, alleging that ERISA’s specification of a particular right of offset for payments made prior to the termination of a plan ( 29 U.S.C. § 1345 ), abrogated the more general common law right…”

Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. Dicenso, 698 F.2d 199 (3rd Cir. 1983). “29 U.S.C. § 1345 (1976). Because the extent of PBGC’s liability on its guarantee is dependent on such factors as plan liabilities to holders of vested pension rights, plan assets, recapture of benefit payments, and the net worth of employers, all of which vary with the passage…”

Fisher v. Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. (D.D.C. 2020). · cites it 2× “4(b) is consistent with ERISA, Fisher cannot now fault the Board for employing traditional tools of statutory interpretation, including the structure of the statute, see Kiewit Power Constructors Co.”

Fisher v. Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. (D.D.C. 2020). · cites it 2× “He first contends that the Board’s arguments based on 29 U.S.C. § 1345 exceeded the scope of the remand because that provision is “not mentioned in the Court’s remand decision.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.