Business Wire published a news release today announcing the new strategic relationship between Securian Financial and Custodia Financial regarding Custodia’s Retirement Loan Protection (RLP) program—”a first-of-its-kind, in-plan feature that helps safeguard employees’ retirement savings by automatically protecting 401(k) loans from default when job loss, disability or death occurs.” It is a program a number of
403(b) plans and lifetime income programs suffer a similar malady: both sorts of arrangements operate in a sort of “exception” environment, where they rely upon atypical application of the standardized qualified plan rules in order to effectively work. This means that these programs are not typically amenable to broad and sweeping policy statements of the
![IMG_2337[73]](https://www.businessofbenefits.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/832/2025/04/IMG_233773.jpg)
Executive’s Life’s 1991 collapse made a mockery of the insurance company rating system. Just months prior to its demise, S&P had given that insurer its highest rating (AAA, “Extremely strong capacity to meet financial commitments”) and Moody’s was awarding it one of their highest ratings at a1. An excellent review of this debacle was published
I had to chuckle a bit when I first read Nevin Adam’s excellent (of course) recap of the latest DC class action lawsuit, this one involving JP Morgan Chase Bank’s DC plan’s selection of stable value funds. He noted the complaint alleges that “throughout the Class Period, identical or substantially identical stable value funds
The ongoing Pension Risk Transfer (PRT) litigation poignantly demonstrates the growing importance of the SECURE Act’s “Annuity Safe Harbor” provision to the continuing efforts to design and develop responsive DC Lifetime Income programs.
The PRT plaintiffs claim fiduciary violations of the DOL’s “safest available annuity” (or “SAU”) requirements under DOL Reg 29 CFR 2550.404a–4 by
There are substantial efforts underway in many parts of the industry to develop similar sorts of benchmarking tools for assessing, comparing and monitoring the growing variety of lifetime income programs for defined contribution plans. A very real challenge these developers face arises from the fundamental difference in the nature of the investments involved: existing equity based assessment tools translate poorly into critiquing programs where decumulation risks are the critical factor. Even the language used to produce these new tools is demanding a new mind set.
Continue Reading Benchmarking Outcomes, Not Fees
There is much to be considered under the new set fiduciary rules recently proposed by the DOL, especially as we sort through the (very extensive) details of this new regulatory regime. We are already hearing much about the impact and change which would be introduced into the market over the expansive reach of this new
Actuaries and mathematicians will tell us that the “actuarial cost” of any annuity you may purchase is effectively the same, no matter what sort of annuity you purchase. After all, your life expectancy is what it is; the interest rates are what they are; and the insurance companies investments supporting the lifetime guarantees are what
Nevin Adams, dropped another one of his gems (this one on cryptocurrency and “innovations” in self-directed brokerage accounts) while I was drafting this piece on 403(b) SDBAs, making my piece even more timely. Its a striking case in point of another unique feature showing the differences between 403(b) plans and 401(k) plans: Not
The DOL’s new ESG rules may have a curious impact on some church related organizations which utilize faith based standards in their retirement plan investments. Their ability to continue do may now turn on the manner in which they handle their status as a “church plan.” It arises because the ESG rules will NOT apply