[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 26, Volume 2]
[Revised as of April 1, 2004]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 26CFR1.79-4T]

[Page 322-327]
 
                       TITLE 26--INTERNAL REVENUE
 
    CHAPTER I--INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 
                               (CONTINUED)
 
PART 1_INCOME TAXES--Table of Contents
 
Sec. 1.79-4T  Questions and answers relating to the nondiscrimination 
requirements for group-term life insurance (temporary).

    Q-1: When does section 79, as amended by the Tax Reform Act of 1984, 
become effective?
    A-1: (a) Generally, section 79, as amended, applies to taxable years 
(of the employee receiving insurance coverage) beginning after December 
31, 1983. There are, however, several exceptions to this effective date 
where there is coverage under a group-term life insurance plan of the 
employer that was in existence on January 1, 1984, or a comparable 
successor to such a plan maintained by the employer or a successor 
employer.
    (b) First, the new rules of section 79 (b) and (e), that require the 
inclusion in income of a retired employee of amounts attributable to the 
cost of group-term life insurance in excess of $50,000 and that include 
former employees within the definition of the term ``employee,'' will 
not apply to any employee who retired from employment on or before 
January 1, 1984.
    (c) Second, in the case of an individual who retires after January 
1, 1984, and before January 1, 1987, the new rules of section 79 (b) and 
(e) do not apply if (1) the individual attained age 55 on or before 
January 1, 1984, and (2) the plan was maintained by the same employer 
who employed the individual during 1983, or by a successor employer.
    (d) Third, in the case of an individual who retires after December 
31, 1986, the new rules of section 79 (b) and (e) do not apply if (1) 
the individual attained age 55 on or before January 1, 1984, (2) the 
plan was maintained by the same employer who employed the individual 
during 1983, or by a successor employer, and (3) the plan is not, after 
December 31, 1986, a discriminatory group-term life insurance plan (not 
taking into account any group-term life insurance coverage provided to 
employees who retired before January 1, 1987).
    (e) For purposes of determining whether a plan is, after December 
31, 1986, a discriminatory group-term life insurance plan, there shall 
be ignored any insurance coverage provided pursuant to a state law 
requirement that an insurer continue to provide insurance coverage for a 
period of time not in excess of two months following the termination of 
a policy.
    Q-2: What is meant by a ``group-term life insurance plan of the 
employer that was in existence on January 1, 1984''?
    A-2: A group-term life insurance plan of the employer was in 
existence on January 1, 1984, only if the group policy or policies 
providing group-term life insurance benefits under the plan were 
executed on or before January 1, 1984, and were not terminated prior to 
such date. The applicability of section 79, as amended, to an employee 
will not be affected by the transfer of the employee between employers 
treated as a single employer under section 79(d)(7) if the employee 
continues, after the transfer, to be provided with group-term life 
insurance benefits under a plan that is comparable (determined under the 
principles set forth in Q&A 3) to the plan provided by the former 
employer.
    Q-3: When is a plan of group-term life insurance a ``comparable 
successor'' to another such plan?
    A-3: A plan of group-term life insurance will be a comparable 
successor to another plan of group-term life insurance (the first plan) 
only if the plan does not differ from the first plan in any significant 
aspect with respect to individuals who are potentially eligible for 
benefits provided under the grandfather provisions in Q&A 1. These 
individuals consist of those persons who are covered under a plan of 
group-term life insurance of the employer that was in existence on 
January 1, 1984, or a comparable successor to such a plan maintained by 
the employer or a successor employer, and who either retired on or 
before January 1, 1984, or who both attained age 55 on or before January 
1, 1984, and were employed by the employer maintaining the plan (or a 
predecessor of that employer) during the year 1983. Accordingly, if 
significant additional or reduced benefits are provided only to 
individuals who are not described in the preceding sentence, the plan 
will be considered a comparable successor plan. A plan will not fail to 
be a comparable successor

[[Page 323]]

plan merely because the employer purchases a policy or policies 
identical to the employer's first plan from a different insurance 
company. If the new plan provides significant additional or reduced 
benefits (either as to the type or amount available) to employees, or 
provides benefits to a category of employees that was formerly excluded 
from participating in the plan, the plan is generally not a comparable 
successor to the first plan. However, a plan will not be considered as 
providing significant additional or reduced benefits merely because a 
participant's coverage is based on a percentage of compensation and the 
participant's compensation for the taxable year has been increased or 
decreased. Furthermore, a plan will not be considered a non-comparable 
successor plan merely because it is amended, either to decrease benefits 
provided to key employees or to increase benefits provided to non-key 
employees, solely in order to comply with the nondiscrimination 
requirements of section 79(d). Finally, a plan will not be considered a 
non-comparable successor plan merely because a policy that is part of a 
discriminatory plan is terminated in order to end discriminatory 
coverage.
    Q-4: For purposes of determining the effective date of section 79, 
as amended by the Tax Reform Act of 1984, what is a ``successor 
employer''?
    A-4: A successor employer is an employer who employs a group of 
individuals formerly employed by another employer as a result of a 
business merger, acquisition or division.
    Q-5: Under what circumstances will separate policies of group-term 
life insurance of an employer be considered to be a single plan in 
determining whether the employer's plan of group-term life insurance is 
discriminatory?
    A-5: All policies providing group-term life insurance to a common 
key employee or key employees (as defined in this Q&A) carried directly 
or indirectly by an employer (or by a group of employers described in 
section 79(d)(7)) will be considered as a single plan for purposes of 
determining whether an employer's group-term life insurance plan is 
discriminatory. For example, if a key employee receives $50,000 of 
group-term life insurance coverage under one policy and the same key 
employee receives an additional $250,000 of coverage under a separate 
group-term life insurance policy, the two policies will be treated as a 
single plan in determining whether the group-term life insurance 
provided by the employer is discriminatory. If it is discriminatory, the 
key employees covered by either policy will not receive the benefit of 
section 79(a)(1) or section 79(c) for either policy. The result is the 
same even if each policy, considered alone, would be nondiscriminatory. 
A policy that provides group-term life insurance to a key employee and a 
policy under which the same key employee is eligible to receive group-
term life insurance upon separation from service will be considered to 
provide group-term life insurance to a common key employee. In addition, 
an employer may treat two or more policies that do not provide group-
term life insurance to a common key employee as constituting a single 
plan for purposes of satisfying the nondiscrimination provisions of 
section 79(d). For example, if the employer provides group-term life 
insurance coverage for non-key employees under one policy and provides 
group-term life insurance coverage for key employees under a second 
policy, the two policies may be considered together in determining 
whether the requirements of section 79(d) are satisfied with regard to 
the second policy. For purposes of this section, the term ``key 
employee'' has the meaning given to such term by paragraph (1) of 
section 416(i), except that subparagraph (A)(iv) of such paragraph shall 
be applied by not taking into account employees described in section 
79(d)(3)(B) who are not participants in the plan. For purposes of this 
section, all references to ``plan year'' or ``plan years'' in section 
416(g)(4)(C) and section 416(i) shall be deleted and replaced with 
``taxable year of the employer'' or ``taxable years of the employer,'' 
respectively.
    Q-6: In the case of a discriminatory group-term life insurance plan, 
what amounts should be included in the gross income of a key employee?
    A-6: (a) In the case of a discriminatory group-term life insurance 
plan, each key employee must include in gross income for the taxable 
year the

[[Page 324]]

cost of his or her insurance benefit for that year provided by the 
employer under the plan.
    (b) The cost of group-term life insurance coverage provided by an 
employer for a key employee during the employee's taxable year is 
determined by apportioning the net premium (group premium less policy 
dividends, premium refunds or experience rating credits) allocable to 
the group-term life insurance coverage during the key employee's taxable 
year, less the actual cost allocated to other key employees pursuant to 
the method described in the subparagraph (d) of this answer, if 
applicable, among the covered employees. In the event that the employer 
has other forms and types of coverage with the same insurer, the 
employer must make a reasonable allocation of the total premiums paid to 
the insurer. For example, where an employer has both health insurance 
coverage and a plan of group-term life insurance with the same insurer, 
and there is no volume discount, the net premium for the plan of group-
term life insurance must include the excess, if any, of the payments the 
employer makes for the health insurance coverage over the payments the 
employer would make for such coverage if the plan of group-term life 
insurance for which this calculation is being made did not exist.
    (c) In general, the portion of the net premium for group-term life 
insurance that should be apportioned to a key employee, other than a key 
employee to whom the method in subparagraph (d) of this answer is 
applicable, is determined by: (1) Calculating a ``tabular'' premium for 
the entire group (with the exception of all key employees to whom the 
method in subparagraph (d) of this answer is applicable), in the manner 
described below, (2) determining the ratio of the total actual net 
premium (less the actual cost allocated to key employees pursuant to the 
method in the subparagraph (d) of this answer) to the total tabular 
premium and (3) multiplying the tabular premium for the key employee at 
his or her attained age by such ratio. Thus, if the total actual net 
premium is 125 percent of the total tabular premium for all covered 
employees and the tabular premium at the key employee's attained age is 
$2.00 per thousand per month, the cost for such employee would be $2.50 
per thousand per month ($2.00 times 125 percent). For these purposes the 
table used to calculate tabular premiums will be determined as follows:
    (i) If the group policy contains a reasonable table (based on 
recognized mortality assumptions) of premium rates on an attained age 
basis (which table may use age brackets not exceeding five years) with 
reference to which the group premium is determined, such table will be 
used;
    (ii) If such table is not available, the 1960 Basic Group Table 
published by the Society of Actuaries will be used.
    (d) In cases where the mortality charge for group-term life 
insurance coverage provided to a key employee is calculated separately 
by the insurer (for example, where the charge for the coverage provided 
to a key employee is based on a medical examination) and the amount of 
such mortality charge plus a proportionate share of the loading charge 
for the coverage provided to the group is higher than the amount that 
would be allocable to such employee under the allocation method in 
subparagraph (c) the cost of group-term life insurance coverage for that 
employee shall be that higher amount.
    Q-7: Must all active and former employees be considered in applying 
the coverage tests in section 79(d)(3) to determine whether or not a 
plan of group-term life insurance is discriminatory with respect to 
coverage?
    A-7: No. Generally, a plan of group-term life insurance which covers 
both active and former employees will not satisfy the nondiscrimination 
requirements of section 79(d) unless the coverage tests in section 
79(d)(3) are satisfied with respect to both the active and the former 
employees of the employer, except to the extent they are excluded from 
tests for discrimination by application of the grandfather provisions 
set forth in Q&A 1. However, for purposes of determining whether a plan 
is discriminatory with respect to coverage, the coverage tests must be 
applied separately to active and former employees. In addition, if the 
plan limits participation by former employees to employees who retired 
from employment

[[Page 325]]

with the employer, then only retired employees must be considered in 
applying the coverage tests to former employees. Also, in applying the 
coverage tests in section 79(d)(3), the employer may make reasonable 
mortality assumptions regarding former employees who are not covered 
under the plan but must be considered in applying the coverage tests. 
Furthermore, only those former employees who terminated employment on or 
after the earliest date of termination from employment for any former 
employee covered by the plan must be considered. Finally, for purposes 
of determining whether a plan of group-term life insurance of the 
employer (or a successor employer) that was in existence on January 1, 
1984 (or a comparable successor to such a plan) is discriminatory, after 
December 31, 1986, with respect to group-term life insurance coverage 
for former employees, coverage provided to employees who retired on or 
before December 31, 1986, shall not be taken into account.
    Q-8: Will a group-term life insurance plan be considered 
discriminatory if active employees receive greater benefits as a 
percentage of compensation than former employees, or vice versa?
    A-8: No. For purposes of determining whether a plan is 
discriminatory with respect to the type and amount of benefits 
available, insurance coverage for former employees must be tested 
separately from insurance coverage for active employees. For example, a 
group-term life insurance plan that provides group-term life insurance 
benefits equal to 200 percent of compensation for all active employees 
and 100 percent of final compensation (based on the average annual 
compensation for the final five years) for all former employees would 
satisfy the nondiscrimination requirements of section 79(d). However, a 
group-term life insurance plan that provides group-term life insurance 
benefits equal to 200 percent of compensation for all active employees 
and 100 percent of final compensation (based on the average annual 
compensation for the final five years) only for key employees who are no 
longer employed by the employer (or a successor employer) would not 
satisfy the nondiscrimination requirement of section 79(d)(2)(A).
    Q-9: Under what circumstances will the amount of benefits available 
under a plan of group-term life insurance be considered not to 
discriminate in favor of participants who are key employees?
    A-9: A plan of group-term life insurance will be considered not to 
discriminate in favor of participants who are key employees, as to the 
amount of benefits available, if the plan provides a fixed amount of 
insurance which is the same for all covered employees. In other 
circumstances, the determination of whether a plan is nondiscriminatory 
will be based on all of the facts and circumstances. Such plans will be 
considered not to discriminate in favor of participants who are key 
employees, as to the amount of benefits available, if the plan contains 
no group of employees described in the following sentence that, if 
tested separately, would fail to satisfy the requirements of section 
79(d)(2)(A). The group subject to separate testing under the preceding 
sentence consists of a key employee and all other participants 
(including other key employees) who receive, under the plan, an amount 
of insurance (as a multiple of compensation (either total compensation 
or the basic or regular rate of compensation)) that is equal to or 
greater than the amount of insurance received by such key employee. As 
described in Q&As 7&8, active and former employees are tested separately 
under section 79(d)(2)(A).

    Example: Assume that a plan of group-term life insurance has 500 
participants, 10 of whom are key employees. Under the plan, 400 of the 
non-key employees receive an amount of insurance equal to 100 percent of 
compensation, while all of the key employees and 90 of the non-key 
employees receive an amount of insurance equal to 200 percent of 
compensation. The plan will be considered not to discriminate in favor 
of the participants who are key employees because, tested separately, 
the group of participants receiving an amount of insurance equal to or 
greater than 200 percent of compensation would satisfy the requirements 
of section 79(d)(2)(A) (by reason of section 79(d)(3)(A)(ii)). If one of 
the key employees received an amount of insurance equal to 300 percent 
of compensation, the plan would be considered to discriminate in favor 
of participants who are key employees, because, tested separately, the 
group consisting of the single key employee receiving an amount of

[[Page 326]]

insurance equal to or greater than 300 percent of compensation would 
fail to satisfy the requirements of section 79(d)(2)(A).

    In determining the groups of employees that are tested separately 
for this purpose, allowance shall be made for reasonable differences in 
amount of insurance (as a multiple of compensation) due to rounding, the 
use of compensation brackets or other similar factors. Thus, if a plan 
bases group-term life insurance coverage on ``compensation brackets,'' 
it is not intended that any participants will be treated as receiving an 
amount of insurance (as a multiple of compensation) that is greater (or 
less) than that of any other participant merely because the first 
participant's compensation is at the lower (or higher) end of a 
compensation bracket while the second participant's compensation is at 
the higher (or lower) end of a compensation bracket. However, any 
compensation brackets utilized by a plan will be examined to determine 
if the brackets, or compensation groupings, result in discrimination in 
favor of key employees. In addition, a plan does not meet the 
requirements for nondiscrimination as to the type and amount of benefits 
available under the plan unless all types of benefits (including 
permanent benefits) and all terms and conditions with respect to such 
benefits which are available to any participant who is a key employee 
are also available on a nondiscriminatory basis to non-key employee 
participants.
    Q-10: How is additional coverage purchased by employees under a plan 
of group-term life insurance treated for purposes of determining whether 
a plan of group-term life insurance is discriminatory?
    A-10: (a) The extent to which employees purchase additional coverage 
under a plan of group-term life insurance is not taken into account for 
purposes of determining whether a plan of group-term life insurance is 
discriminatory. For example, a plan providing insurance to all employees 
of 1 times annual compensation, which gives all employees the option to 
purchase additional insurance of 1 times annual compensation at their 
own expense, would not be considered discriminatory as to the type and 
amount of benefits available, even if the group (or groups) of 
participants who purchase additional insurance, if tested separately, 
would not satisfy the requirements of section 79(d)(2)(A). Solely for 
this purpose, the choice of an amount of group-term life insurance as a 
benefit under a cafeteria plan will be treated as the purchase of group-
term life insurance by an employee. If additional insurance coverage is 
available to any key employee that is not available, on a 
nondiscriminatory basis, to non-key employees, the plan will be 
considered discriminatory, even if the full cost of such additional 
insurance coverage is paid by the employee(s) electing such benefits.
    (b) If the employer bears a part of the expense of any additional 
coverage that is purchased by an employee under a plan of group-term 
life insurance, the additional insurance shall be treated, in part, as 
an amount of insurance provided by the employer under the plan and, in 
part, as an amount of insurance purchased by the employee. Except to the 
extent provided in subparagraph (a) above, the portion of insurance 
treated as an amount of insurance purchased by the employee is not taken 
into account for purposes of determining whether the plan is 
discriminatory. Whether such insurance (together with any other 
insurance provided by the employer under the plan) will cause the plan 
to be considered to discriminate in favor of participants who are key 
employees is determined under the rules of Q&A 9.
    Q-11: What effect do the provisions of section 79(d)(1) have if a 
plan of group-term life insurance is discriminatory for only part of a 
year?
    A-11: If a plan of group-term life insurance is discriminatory at 
any time during the key employee's taxable year, then it is a 
discriminatory group-term life insurance plan for that taxable year and 
the provisions of section 79(d)(1) will be applicable with respect to 
all group-term life insurance costs allocable to that employee for that 
year.
    Q-12: Are the section 79(d) provisions independent from the 
requirements contained in Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.79-1?
    A-12: Yes. Treasury regulation Sec. 1.79-1(c)(1) provides that life 
insurance provided to a group of employees cannot

[[Page 327]]

qualify as group-term life insurance if it is provided to less than ten 
full-time employees unless certain requirements are satisfied. The 
satisfaction of these requirements does not guarantee that the plan will 
be nondiscriminatory, and vice versa. Treasury regulation Sec. 1.79-
1(a)(4) provides that life insurance is not group-term life insurance 
unless the amount of insurance provided to each employee is computed 
under a formula that precludes individual selection. The mere fact that 
a life insurance policy is nondiscriminatory is not determinative as to 
whether the policy precludes individual selection, and vice versa.

[T.D. 8073, 51 FR 4315, Feb. 4, 1986; 51 FR 7262, Mar. 3, 1986]