Notwithstanding sections 1053 and 1054 of this title, in any case in which benefit payments under an insolvent multiemployer plan exceed the resource benefit level, any such payments of benefits which are not basic benefits shall be suspended, in accordance with this section, to the extent necessary to reduce the sum of such payments and the payments of such basic benefits to the greater of the resource benefit level or the level of basic benefits, unless an alternative procedure is prescribed by the corporation under section 1322a(g)(5) of this title.
29 U.S. Code § 1426. Insolvent plans
Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 113–235, § 108(a)(2)(B), designated existing provisions as subpar. (A), struck out “(within the meaning of section 1421(b)(6) of this title)” after “pay status”, and added subpar. (B).
Subsec. (d)(4). Pub. L. 113–235, § 108(a)(2)(C)(ii), added par. (4).
Subsec. (e)(1)(A). Pub. L. 113–235, § 108(a)(2)(D)(i), substituted “the parties described in section 1021(f)(1) of this title” for “the corporation, the parties described in section 1422(a)(2) of this title, and the plan participants and beneficiaries”.
Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 113–235, § 108(a)(2)(E), added subsec. (g).
2006—Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 109–280 substituted “5 plan years” for “3 plan years” the second place it appeared and inserted at end “If the plan sponsor makes such a determination that the plan will be insolvent in any of the next 5 plan years, the plan sponsor shall make the comparison under this paragraph at least annually until the plan sponsor makes a determination that the plan will not be insolvent in any of the next 5 plan years.”
Amendment by Pub. L. 113–235 applicable with respect to plan years beginning after Dec. 31, 2014, see section 108(c) of div. O of Pub. L. 113–235, set out as an Effective Date of Repeal note under section 418 of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code.
 So in original. Probably should be “section”.
 So in original.
 So in original. The comma probably should be “and”.