A couple of decades ago, I attended an ERISA litigation conference where one of the topics of discussion was the potential for lawsuits from participants who were placed in stable value (then known as "fixed funds") investment funds in a 401(k) plan, who would claim somehow that it was a fiduciary obligation to optimize gains
July 2012
FAB 2012-2/ Q15’s Impact on 403(b)
One of the more difficult questions that has arisen under the 404a-5 participant disclosure rules is related to those pesky "old" 403(b) contracts. In the multiple vendor ERISA world, where a number of vendors have been in and out of the plan over decades, the question becomes whether-and to what extent-the 404a-5 disclosures have to…
A Twist to the “Amount Involved” In a 408(b)(2) Prohibited Transaction
The disclosures related to 408()(2) are really just a precursor to the next step: the imposition of the prohibited transaction taxes and penalties related to compensation which fails to meet those standards. It looks like the regs have the effect of shifting the application of the rules related to the "amount involved" in the transaction…
Behind 408(b)2’s Looking Glass: Parties-In-Interest, Non-CSPs and Other Complex Tales
Now that the initial 408(b)(2) disclosures are out, the challenge becomes understanding them. Beyond just understanding whether or not the fees disclosed are reasonable (a challenge in itself), the disclosures do something arguably more important: they take us behind the looking glass, opening a window to a world with which most are not familiar, but…