Benefits Law Update
        Practical advice from Verrill attorneys

        Section 409A Basics: Deferral Elections and Discretionary Bonuses

        by Eric D. Altholz on February 12, 2012

        The Final Regulations under Code Section 409A took effect nearly five years ago. By now those of us who regularly deal with deferred compensation issues have fully internalized the core requirements of Section 409A. We have even managed to sensitize our clients and other professionals to the possibility that Section 409A issues can arise in a variety of contexts outside the strict parameters of a formal deferred compensation arrangement. Nevertheless, certain simple questions still cause us to revisit basic Section 409A concepts simply because the answers we produce are frequently jarring (even to us) and frustrating (for employers). One such question relates to the timing of deferral elections made with respect to discretionary bonuses.

        Here’s a familiar hypothetical. Suppose an employer announces that it will award discretionary bonuses for services performed in 2012, and will decide which employees will receive bonuses and in what amounts at the beginning of 2013. If the employer wishes to make available to its employees the possibility of deferring all or a portion of the bonuses that they may or may not receive in 2013 (with respect to services performed in 2012), when must those deferral elections be made? Countless employers establish discretionary bonus programs that operate in exactly this way, and yet the answer to the question always causes us to double check the rules under Code Section 409A. That is because the answer requires us to reconcile an apparent conceptual inconsistency between a core statutory requirement and a key regulatory definition.

        The Section 409A regulations state that a plan or arrangement provides for a “deferral of compensation” if an employee has a “legally binding right” during a taxable year to compensation that, pursuant to the terms of the plan or arrangement, is or may be payable in a later taxable year. See Regulations Section 1.409A-1(b)(1). An employee does not have a “legally binding right” to compensation, however, if the compensation may be unilaterally reduced or eliminated by the employer after the services creating the right to the compensation have been performed. In our example, the employer determines the amount of the bonus in its sole discretion in the taxable year after the year in which the services are performed. The employer may award a large bonus, a small bonus, or no bonus to any or all of the eligible employees. Under this bonus program, therefore, an employee does not have a legally binding right to the bonus until the bonus is determined and announced (in our example, 2013) – only then has the employer relinquished its unilateral discretion to reduce or eliminate the bonus. So one would think that an employee has least until the end of the performance period (2012 in our example) to make a deferral election as to the completely discretionary bonus that is not yet determined or announced. But one would be wrong.

        Code Section 409A(a)(4) generally provides that compensation for services performed during a taxable year may be deferred at an employee’s election only if the election to defer the compensation is made not later than the close of the taxable year preceding the year in which the services are rendered. This rule is developed, in a somewhat convoluted way, in Regulations Section 1.409A-2(a)(1), which attempts to explain how and when an initial deferral election must be made with respect to a given “period of service.” The regulation does recognize the tricky interplay between the “legally binding right” concept and the “period of service” concept when it comes to bonuses. It says that, in our example, an employee who could receive a discretionary bonus in 2013 with respect to services performed in 2012 would have to make the deferral election (if at all) prior to the end of 2011. But if there were any doubt, the Preamble to the Section 409A regulations (in paragraph VI.A) disposes of the matter in no uncertain terms. The Preamble states: “even where [a] bonus is discretionary such that the legally binding right to the bonus does not arise under after the period of service for which the bonus is paid has begun, [an employee’s] deferral election must occur before the year in which the period of service begins” unless some other exception applies (such as the special rules relating to performance-based compensation).

        Employers always seem surprised that an employee can be expected to make a deferral election more than one year before the employee even knows whether he or she is eligible for a bonus. Somehow that just doesn’t seem reasonable. Yet, every time we check, we find that is what Code Section 409A requires.

        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.

        Key Contacts

        Subscribe

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

        Firm Highlights

        Published Works

        Four Verrill Attorneys Co-Author Massachusetts Trends and Developments Chapter for Chambers and Partners Child Relocation 2026 Guide

        Verrill attorneys Mary H. Schmidt, Rachel A. Deering, Hannah R. Zukoff, and Mariah G. Tappan co-authored the “Trends and Developments” chapter...
        Blog

        A New Protected Class in Maine: Holders of Final Protection Orders

        In the lead-up to Domestic Violence Awareness Month in October, employers may be taking a closer look at how their policies and practices respond to...
        Alerts and Newsletters

        Verrill Secures SJC Victory for Boston Legacy FC in White Stadium Litigation

        Verrill has secured a significant appellate victory for Boston Legacy FC in the litigation challenging the redevelopment of White Stadium in...
        Blog

        Hurry Up and Wait

        This is the third in a series of Verrill blog posts on Maine’s packaging extended producer responsibility (“EPR”) law[1]. In July we reported...
        Media Mentions

        Robert Keach Discusses First Brands Chapter 11 Case in Law360

        Verrill attorney Robert Keach was recently quoted in a Law360 article examining the rejection of First Brands Group's Chapter 11 plan and the...
        Media Mentions

        Cybersecurity and AI Governance: Scott Anderson Featured in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

        Verrill Managing Partner Scott Anderson was recently featured in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly discussing how law firms can build attorney buy-in for...
        Blog

        Section 530A Account Update: ERISA Status of Trump Accounts

        The Department of Labor has issued important guidance addressing whether employer programs that permit contributions to Section 530A accounts (and...
        Press Releases

        97 Verrill Attorneys Recognized by Best Lawyers® 2027, Including Four Named Lawyers of the Year

        AUGUSTA, Maine, BANGOR, Maine, BOSTON, Mass., PORTLAND, Maine, and WESTPORT, Conn., (August 20, 2026) – Verrill is proud to announce that 97...
        Alerts and Newsletters

        SEC’s Proposed “Reg Crypto”: What Founders Need to Know

        Startup founders and emerging-growth companies have a number of options for raising capital under the federal securities laws, including Regulation D...
        Blog

        After 45 Years, the IRS Speaks on DCAP Nondiscrimination Testing – And It’s Good News

        Employers that provide a Dependent Care Assistance Program will be pleased to learn that for the first time in 45 years, the IRS has issued guidance...
        Media Mentions

        U.S. Courts Highlights Annabel Rodriguez’s Journey from Fellow to Mentor

        Verrill attorney Annabel Rodriguez was featured in a recent U.S. Courts article titled “From Fellows to Mentors: Alumni Share Lasting Lessons from...
        Media Mentions

        Robert Keach Discusses Bankruptcy Auction Strategy in Law360

        Verrill attorney Robert Keach spoke with Law360 article examining the complex bankruptcy auction process that resulted in the sale of 23 summer...