For the casual observer, the shifting tangle of laws and regulations governing the behaviors of retirement plan fiduciaries can seem almost comically complex. For industry practitioners, wrestling with regulatory compliance is a daily battle, and one with potentially dire personal and professional consequences. Below you will find a roundup of significant regulatory events from 2019. We hope you’ll share some of what you read with a client or colleague.
The DOL is aiming to “modernize fiduciary practices related to the voting rights associated with ERISA plan investments and harmonize those regulations with the requirements of other regulators.”
Read more >
While not divided across political lines, the parties in Sulyma v. Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee view the question of what establishes “actual knowledge” of an alleged fiduciary breach under ERISA very differently.
Read more >
HELPER Act would allow Americans to annually take up to $5,250 from a 401(k), 403(b), 457 plan or IRA—tax and penalty free—to pay for college or pay back student loans.
Read more >
Supporters of the Massachusetts proposal say the state-based regulations will be far more effective in tamping down on brokerage industry conflicts of interest compared with the national Regulation Best Interest.
Read more >
As the appellate decision explains, ownership percentages are less important than organizations’ operating structures when determining withdrawal liability from a multiemployer union pension.
Read more >
While the GDPR does not directly address U.S. benefit plans, it should be of particular interest to defined contribution plan sponsors and their service providers because they hold personal information for each plan participant.
Read more >
For those workers who are offered a retirement savings plan at work, the U.S. retirement system functions pretty well; solutions are needed, however, to extend coverage to millions more Americans.
A federal judge previously moved forward ERISA claims against retirement plan providers and has recently allowed for a counterclaim by the providers against the plan sponsor.
Plan participants allege prohibited transactions between a plan sponsor and its investment manager relating to a revamp of the plan's investment lineup.
The case is expected to help determine whether the millions of Americans whose pensions are held in defined benefit plans have the right to sue the fiduciaries of their plans for mismanaging assets, even when their own retirement benefit has not suffered.
