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
- New Jersey Structured Settlement Factoring Reform NJ A5695 — Tighter Rules for Structured Settlement Cash Now
- Daily Rates: An Important Cost Driver of Structured Settlements
- 🔥Founder and Former CEO of 777 Partners, Joshua Wander, Pleads Guilty⚖️ to $500 Million Fraud Scheme — DOJ Confirms Double‑Pledging, Misappropriation of Structured‑Settlement Funds, and Falsified Bank Statements
- The Steering Problem Needs a Wake‑Up Call
- Companies Still Using the Incorrect Term “Secondary Market Annuity”
about
Category: Single Claimant 468B
Single Claimant 468B is a category that includes blogs with news and commentary concerning qualified settlement funds with a single claimant that may be helpful to personal injury lawyers, claimants and other parties. 468B refeers to the section of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, that is a foundational rule concerning QSFs.
-
A structured settlement lock in is a commitment. The life insurer, relying on the commitment and must set aside assets to cover the obligation. If the funding does not later materialize and investment values go in the wrong direction, the insurer must eat the loss.
-
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.
-
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.
-
If certain requirements are met Rev-Proc 93-94 permits the QSF to be a party to a suit or agreement for the purpose of IRC 130, thus enabling qualified assignments to be done out of a qualified settlement fund
-
It is unfortunate that the overly aggressive and excessive use of QSFs by a small group of structured settlement brokers and planners could potentially lead to unfavorable outcomes from the Treasury. This may prompt increased scrutiny from annuity issuers and reduce options available to injury victims.
-
With respect to “no cost ” qualified settlement funds Counsel for the Arkansas Insurance Department, faced with the same set of facts presented to NY, stated: “After reviewing the NY Department’s opinion, I am of the opinion that the Arkansas Insurance Code would prohibit the activity
-
It was a case of “Dick’ not getting ‘Jack’ when, as expected, the Treasury Panel conducting yesterday’s IRC 104(a)(2 hearing) stuffed ‘forum shopping’ interlopers Jack Meligan and Dick Risk by stating that the hearing WAS NOT the forum IRC 468B single claimant qualified settlement funds.
-
Rev Proc 93-34 provides assurance that a designated settlement fund or qualified settlement fund will satisfy the “party to the suit or agreement” requirement set forth in IRC 130(c)(1), which is the part of the Internal Revenue Code governing qualified assignments in structured settlement transactions.
-
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…
-
A qualified settlement fund has its place in the settlement planning process on certain cases. In those cases, particularly those involving multiple claimants, it can be an incredibly useful settlement planning tool.