The Supreme Court of the United States has decided in favor of the Internal Revenue Service in United States v. Quality Stores, Inc., holding that severance payments made pursuant to plans that did not tie payments to the receipt of state unemployment insurance are subject to Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax. The decision overturns a taxpayer-friendly decision from the U.S Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which, if upheld, could have resulted in FICA tax refund claims to individuals and employers.
A District Court in Eastern Michigan recently rejected a motion to dismiss a participant’s benefit claim, holding that an employer legally could be liable to a participant in a nonqualified deferred compensation plan when the employer did not properly withhold FICA tax in the manner most advantageous to the participant. As a best practice, plan administrators should scrutinize any participant communications or claim responses because they can open the door to estoppel claims under ERISA.
Employers extending benefit coverage to employees’ same-sex spouses and partners should review their payroll procedures to ensure that such coverages are properly taxed for federal income and FICA tax purposes. Employers also should review the options in Notice 2013-61 and consider filing claims for refunds or adjustments of FICA overpayments.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently held that certain dismissal payments were Supplemental Unemployment Compensation Benefits (SUB) exempt from FICA taxes—a clear split with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision in line with an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Revenue Ruling that significantly narrowed the criteria for determining whether certain separation payments qualify as SUB pay. For employers that have made significant reductions in force payments in open years, the Quality Stores decision could lead to significant refunds of FICA tax.
Subscribe
