Structured Settlements 4Real®Blog 2026
Structured settlements expert John Darer reviews the latest structured settlements and settlement planning information and news, and provides expert opinion and highly regarded commentary. that is spicy, Informative, irreverent and effective for over 20 years.
recent posts
- Corinthian Museum of Content Barfing — News Flash
- SettlementDecisions Episode 5: What SettlementDecisions Really Is — A Lead Funnel, Not an Information Source
- Structured Settlement Annuity Guarantees Help Financial Peace of Mind
- How Sheron Jones Was Exploited — And Why D.C.’s Failure to Mandate IPA in SSPA Enabled It
- Attorney Fee Structured Settlement Factoring
about
Category: 468B Qualified Settlement Funds
468B Qualified Settlement Funds (QSF) are a type of trust or account established to manage settlement proceeds from legal disputes, providing tax advantages and structured distribution for claimants. 468B refers to IRC Section 468B, a section of the Internal Reveneue Code of 1986, as amended.
-
If it was as simple as a state court judge being the final arbiter on tax disputes, why, over 5 years ago, did the Society of Settlement Planners hire expensive NYC law firm Skadden Arps to request guidance from the Treasury Department on single claimant 468B qualified settlement funds?
-
When pressed for an answer any qualified settlement adviser will tell you that while a 468B qualified settlement fund is a useful settlement tool, it is neither appropriate nor practical to use an IRC 468B Qualified Settlement Fund for every case of every size, single claimant or otherwise.
-
The United States Depart of Treasury has issued long rumored Final Regulations on IRC 468B. Before “QSF jockeys” start cracking open their Veuve Cliquot, the issue of “single claimant” qualified settlement funds was NOT addressed, despite being on the Guidance Project list.
-
As things sit today, if you want a structured settlement out of such single claimant qualified settlement funds, your client will not get the full market opportunities that the proponents advertise. This fact may or may not be made transparent by the proponent.
-
I’m talking about the kind of “shrinkage” that mischaracterizes a useful settlement planning tool for “solid waste”. That is the major difference that exists between ” IRC 468B” and IRC 468b or 468(b)
-
A leading tax authority on structured settlements, Robert Wood recommends “avoiding the single claimant controversy by establishing QSFs with multiple claimants”
-
Some settlement planners suggest the use of a QSF to skirt around the approved list of annuity markets of the liability insurer, pitching that it will give the plaintiff a “full market survey” yet end up limiting the choices for clients, because few markets willing to take an assignment from a QSF.
-
A great question when one looks at thel usage of qualified settlement funds in mass tort cases and other large settlements. The answer turns on the FDIC’s recognition of a fiduciary relationship and the ability to prove that each claimant has an identifiable interest in the fund.
-
This author submits that certain settlement planners thought that Treasury guidance on the Single Claimant 468B qualified settlement fund was a forgone conclusion given that it was on the Priority Guidance plan for so many years. Then it was inexplicably omitted from the 2009-2010 Priority Guidance Plan. The settlement planners panicked and obviously came up…
-
The proposed regs would eliminate the requirement that damages be based on “tort or tort type rights” in order to qualify for the section 104(a)(2) tax exclusion, and Incorporate 1996 legislation requiring that personal injuries and sickness damages be “physical” in order to qualify for the 104(a)(2) tax exclusion