With some exceptions, PBGC premium payers and data providers can now assume filing relief from the pension insurer in each case that the IRS issues its own disaster-related relief that impacts the filing of Forms 5500.
Under the restricted determination letter program created by IRS Revenue Procedure 2016-37, a plan can now request a determination letter only in very limited circumstances; attorneys with Groom Law Group are calling for a new expansion of the program.
Ryan Labs president Richard Familetti reflects on the increasingly prominent role of investment consultants in helping to shape LDI strategies and other pension plan behaviors.
A district court has ruled that the complaint “does not sufficiently plead that the defendants were engaged in the conduct of an association-in-fact enterprise or that each defendant engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity.”
To help ease the immediate concerns and confusion of clients, the law firm Stroock has published a helpful guide that dissects the latest fiduciary rule developments; on one attorney’s assessment, it actually is not that likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will get involved.
Some investors cite the concern that publicly owned companies may be “greenwashing” reported data to enhance their image from the ESG investing perspective, cited by 37% in a new Natixis survey.
A recent appellate court decision underscores the important differences in anti-cutback vesting requirements that exist between “top-hat” plans and retirement benefits for lower-compensated employees.
The district court decision spells out a number of caveats impacting this type of ERISA litigation, explaining why it is dismissing some claims while permitting others to go to a full trial.
A new ruling has emerged in the long-running case, applying instructions from the Supreme Court and the 9th Circuit to reach a verdict favorable to plaintiffs.
Many retirement industry providers will be glad to see the DOL is starting to signal a delay in the applicability date of the full new fiduciary rule and its prohibited transaction provisions.
In general, if a covered service provider will continue after the fiduciary rule to provide services only in a non-fiduciary capacity, or has already effectively disclosed investment advice fiduciary status, no additional disclosure would be required under the 408b(2) regulation.
Several states are in the process of debating and potentially adopting their own legislation relating to the fiduciary responsibilities of broker/dealers and investment advisers.
At least one judge on the three-judge panel that has been assigned to the case seemed to have little sympathy for the basic strokes of the DOL’s arguments.