Benefits Law Update
        Practical advice from Verrill attorneys

        Handling Missing Participants under Code Section 409A

        April 15, 2019

        Deferred compensation payments are due to one of your former executives, but the former executive is nowhere to be found. You know that the IRS has strict timing rules for payments subject to Code Section 409A (but maybe not as strict as you think). The end of the tax year is approaching fast. What to do?

        Missing participants can be a problem for benefit plan sponsors in a variety of contexts. Sponsors of qualified plans can turn to IRS and DOL guidance on what do to when a missing participant is owed required minimum distributions or the plan is being terminated and assets must be distributed.

        For executive compensation arrangements subject to Section 409A, however, there is no clear guidance on how to handle missing participants. This presents a problem for employers when payments are due in one tax year, but the participant is not located until a later tax year, because it is unclear whether withholding and IRS reporting requirements must be fulfilled in the year the payment is due, even if no payment is actually made. And, Section 409A requires that deferred compensation may only be paid at prescribed times. If payments under a Section 409A plan are not being delivered because the participant can’t be located, there is a risk that when payments are finally made, they will be late and in violation of the Section 409A timing rules.

        One option is for the employer to treat the participant as being in constructive receipt of the payments, and report the payments to the IRS as if they were distributed to the participant. This may create issues down the road, however, if the participant is never located and questions arise about what to do with the money that was treated as distributed.

        Another solution is to suspend the payments until the participant is located and report the payments in the year they are distributed. In the absence of clear guidance, employers may be able to take this approach, so long as plan language, distribution forms, or administrative procedures require a participant to provide up-to-date contact information as a condition of payment, and the employer makes a reasonable effort to locate the participant. Accordingly, we suggest that employers update their plan documents, distribution forms, or administrative procedures along those lines.

        If a participant in a Section 409A plan goes missing, the employer should make reasonable efforts to locate the participant or an appropriate beneficiary by following the steps outlined in the DOL’s guidance on locating missing participants. The employer should maintain a record of the payment history, stale checks, and the efforts made to locate the participant. The search should be periodically renewed, but until the participant is found, the employer may suspend payments, relying on the provision in its plan requiring the participant to provide contact information prior to receiving payment.

        Although following the steps outlined above should protect the employer from risks associated with failing to make or report the payments, this will not necessarily protect the participant from excise taxes for receiving a distribution outside the periods allowed under Section 409A. In fact, the regulations suggest that the opposite is true, and a participant that misses payments due to the participant’s failure to provide up-to-date contact information will be subject to the penalty and premium interest taxes if the payments violate the timing rules of Section 409A when the payments are eventually made.

        Benefits Law Update

        Verrill’s Benefits Law Update blog delivers timely insights and practical guidance on the ever-evolving landscape of employee benefits and executive compensation. Our blog provides up-to-date analysis and commentary on a wide range of topics, including timely updates on developments in law affecting employee benefit plans and executive compensation arrangements.

        Subscribe

        Looking for more great content? Subscribe for regular legal updates and information delivered right to your inbox.

        Firm Highlights

        Blog

        What is a Bonus for Purposes of ERISA?

        An ongoing dispute about a Department of Labor advisory opinion published last September raises a basic but unanswered question under the ERISA: What...
        Media Mentions

        Verrill Recognized by WMTW for Partnership Supporting Hunger Relief in Maine

        Verrill was recently featured in coverage by WMTW News 8 for its role in a collaborative effort to combat food insecurity across southern...
        Press Releases

        33 Verrill Attorneys, Across Four Offices, Recognized in the 2026 Chambers USA Guide

        BOSTON, Massachusetts, PORTLAND, Maine, WESTPORT, Connecticut, and WASHINGTON, D.C. – Verrill has been recognized as a Leading Firm in 14...
        Blog

        Will the Knicks Beat the Spurs? (Are Prediction Market Event Contracts Gambling?)

        For those of you who like to keep score, currently 18 states are engaged in litigation over prediction markets, such as Kalshi and Polymarket,...
        Alerts and Newsletters

        DOJ Announces Faster Review and Enhanced Enforcement for Benefits-Fraud FCA Matters

        On May 27, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Division issued a new memorandum, “Accelerating Review and Enhancing Enforcement in...
        Alerts and Newsletters

        DOJ Announces Minnesota Health Care Fraud Takedown; Signals Intensified Medicaid Enforcement Nationwide

        On May 21, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced a first-of-its kind Minnesota Health Care Fraud Takedown charging 15 defendants, including...
        Media Mentions

        Lauren Galvin Quoted in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly on Arbitration and Anti-SLAPP Protections

        Verrill Partner Lauren Galvin was recently featured in a Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly article highlighting a notable Superior Court decision...
        Blog

        Section 530A Accounts: What Employers Should Consider Before Offering Contributions to “Trump” Accounts

        Section 530A accounts, commonly referred to as Trump accounts, have attracted attention since the enactment of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in...
        Blog

        Navigating PBM Reform: Regulatory Changes, Market Shifts, and Practical Guidance for ERISA Fiduciaries

        Pharmacy Benefit Manager (“PBM”) arrangements have long relied on rebates with limited transparency into true drug costs. Recent regulatory and...
        Blog

        DOL’s Proposed Regulation on Selecting Alternative Investments: Broad Implications for 401(k) and 403(b) Plan Fiduciaries

        On March 30, 2026, the Department of Labor issued a proposed regulation purporting to implement an executive order to expand access to “alternative...
        Press Releases

        Verrill Welcomes Private Clients & Fiduciary Services Attorney Gracie Castle

        BOSTON, Massachusetts – Verrill is pleased to welcome Gracie Castle to the firm’s Private Clients & Fiduciary Services Group as an Associate,...
        Published Works

        Francesco De Vito Authors Article in the Journal of the American College of Mortgage Attorneys

        Verrill Partner Frank De Vito authored an article featured in the Spring 2026 issue of The Abstract, the journal of the American College of Mortgage...