Treasury and IRS Announce 2003-2004 Priority Guidance Plan for Employee Benefits Issues
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.22.03
The Treasury Department's Office of Tax Policy and the IRS have announced their 2003-04 priority guidance plan. This is a list of the items that have been identified as the top areas in which guidance will be provided.
In the retirement benefit area, the list includes guidance on phased retirement arrangements; proposed nondiscrimination regulations for cash balance plans (unless Congress enacts a moratorium on the issuance of such regulations-see V, below); minimum required distribution regulations for qualified plans, guidance on Code Section 403(b) tax-deferred annuity plans, final regulations on S corporation ESOPs, guidance on the Code's age discrimination rules for qualified plans, anti-cutback guidance, guidance on use of electronic technologies for various retirement plan transactions. and model provisions for Code Section 457(b) deferred compensation arrangements.
In the areas of executive compensation, health care and other benefits, the list includes guidance on elections between taxable and nontaxable benefits; guidance on "restricted property" under Code Section 83; guidance on disability payments; guidance on health reimbursement accounts (HRAs); guidance on debit cards; guidance on health care provider incentive payments; and a revenue ruling under Code Section 4980B on Medicare entitlement as a second qualifying event under COBRA.
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
