Unpaid Multiemployer Plan Contributions not Dischargeable

A federal bankruptcy court ruled a plan fiduciary still owes contributions to multiemployer plans though he filed for bankruptcy.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge William C. Hillman of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts noted in his decision that under the trust agreements for the Massachusetts Bricklayers and Masons Health and Welfare Fund, Pension Fund and Annuity Fund, unpaid contributions that are due and owing are assets of the funds. According to the opinion, James M. Fahey Jr., president, treasurer and sole shareholder of Zani Tile Co. did not dispute that he was aware of his obligations to the funds, but failed to remit the contributions.

Hillman said the undisputed facts of the case indicate that Fahey instead prioritized the payment of corporate expenses that were beneficial to him, such as a bank loan that he personally guaranteed and his personal loan to Zani, over his obligations to the funds. “In so doing, he violated the duty of loyalty to the beneficiaries of the funds. Therefore, I find that the debtor committed a defalcation within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4),” Hillman wrote in the opinion.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

Section 523(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code excepts from discharge debts for “defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity.” Hillman relied on a U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bullock v. BankChampaign, N.A., in which the high court clarified that “where the conduct at issue does not involve bad faith, moral turpitude or other immoral conduct, the term requires an intentional wrong. We include as intentional not only conduct that the fiduciary knows is improper but also reckless conduct of the kind that the criminal law often treats as the equivalent. … Where actual knowledge of wrongdoing is lacking, we consider conduct as equivalent if the fiduciary ‘consciously disregards’ (or is willfully blind to) ‘a substantial and unjustifiable risk’ that his conduct will turn out to violate a fiduciary duty.”

According to Hillman’s opinion, as Zani’s “sole decisionmaker,” Fahey was in charge of day-to-day operations and was responsible for the company’s book-keeping, including payment of Zani’s bills. Zani was timely in its payment of contributions to the multiemployer plans until November 2008, at which time payments became consistently late. In March 2009, Zani ceased making payments altogether.

Fahey filed his voluntary Chapter 7 petition on January 21, 2011. He listed the multiemployer plan trustee’s claim on “Schedule F – Creditors Holding Unsecured Nonpriority Claims,” assigning it an approximate value of $200,000. On April 12, 2011, the trustee filed a complaint seeking to establish the nondischargeability of all unpaid deductions and contributions.

The opinion for In Re: James M. Fahey, Jr., Debtor is here.

What Affects Retirement Income Adequacy?

A policy forum sponsored by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) examined factors affecting retirement income adequacy and decisions that can mitigate their impact.

At the forum, “Decisions, Decisions: Choices That Affect Retirement Income Adequacy,” experts on U.S. retirement policy offered insights about topics such as the impacts of a sustained low-interest-rate environment on retirement savings and retirement income, the influences of the employer match in 401(k) plans, and suggestions about how to help plans and participants optimize their distribution choices—in particular rollover, drawdown and annuity options.

Findings presented at the policy forum included:

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

  • Roughly one-quarter of Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers, who would have had adequate retirement income under historical averages, would end up running short of money in retirement if today’s rates are assumed to be a permanent condition, although there is likely to be little impact from low bond rates on the lowest-income group.
  • The current interest rate environment, and its duration, has implications for defined contribution plans in term of the type(s) of fixed-income offerings on the menu, as well as stable-value and target-date funds.
  • The economic environment has had an impact on employer contributions to 401(k) plans—although among the minority of plan sponsors that suspended their matching contributions during the recent recession, many have restored them. Few employers have moved to less frequent matching cycles (such as annually), and the vast majority provide a 401(k) match coincident with their payroll cycle.
  • The level of the match seems to have an impact on contribution levels in voluntary-enrollment 401(k) plans, less so with automatic enrollment plan designs.
  • There doesn’t appear to be any linkage between adopting automatic enrollment and changes to the employer contribution level/timing.
  • The vast majority of defined benefit (pension) plan participants who were not forced to take an annuity chose to take a lump-sum distribution.
  • Plan design matters, both in term of the savings decisions participants make, and the decisions they make post-retirement.

 

Summaries of presentations are published in the July EBRI Notes online here.

«