3796. Does a plan participant and the participant’s spouse have to be married for a certain length of time before QJSA and QPSA requirements apply?polearyrcline212005-04-08T19:45:00Z2015-07-20T13:37:00Z2015-07-20T13:37:00Z13311890Hewlett-Packard Company1542217142007-10-05T00:00:00ZTaxFactsDefaultArticleSite Map/Life Insurance/Income Taxation/Proceeds/Living/Disposition/Sale or Purchase of a Contract115140262-00-tf1.xml263.00;#2099;#0x010100C568DB52D9D0A14D9B2FDCC96666E9F2007948130EC3DB064584E219954237AF3900242457EFB8B24247815D688C526CD44D009C4E67E972694125ABDA91AC61F5E51FTax Facts 1If the owner of a life insurance or endowment contract sells the contract, such as in a life settlement, what are the income tax consequences to the seller?74200.0000000000TaxFactsDefaultArticleSBMEDIA\moss-admin2010-01-14T23:41:49Z3796. Do a plan participant and the participant’s spouse have to be married for a certain length of time before QJSA and QPSA requirements apply?A plan generally is not required to provide either the QJSA or the QPSA (but may do so) if the participant and the spouse were not married throughout the one year period ending on the earlier of the participant’s annuity starting date (see Q 3792) or the date of the participant’s death. If a participant marries within one year before the annuity starting date and the participant and the participant’s spouse were married for at least a one year period ending on or before the date of the participant’s death, the participant and the spouse are treated as though they had been married throughout the one year period ending on the participant’s annuity starting date..IRC Sec. 417(d); Treas. Reg. §1.401(a)-20, A-25(b)(2). Special rules may apply where there is a qualified domestic relations order (“QDRO”) in effect that applies to plan benefits (Q 3816).Planning Point: Because of the administrative difficulties involved, plan sponsors should consider whether the costs of imposing a one year of marriage requirement outweigh any potential savings. Where possible, plan sponsors should design plans to minimize the administrative processes for profit sharing plans.Planning Point: In United States v. Windsor,. 33 S.Ct. 2645 (2013). the Supreme Court found unconstitutional the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman and spouse as a person of the opposite sex. Revenue Ruling 2013-17. 2013-38 I.R.B. 201. provides that for federal tax purposes, spouse means a person of the same sex if lawfully married under state law and marriage includes marriage between persons of the same sex. Notice 2014-19. 2014-17 I.R.B. 979. provides further guidance on the application of Windsor and Revenue Ruling 2013-17 to qualified plans. The Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. 2015 BL 204553 (2015). requires states to recognize same sex marriages performed in other states. This ruling will simplify plan administration, as administrators will no longer have to apply the place of celebration rule to determine whether the marriage was lawful.