Leaderboard

They can... but a few things to keep in mind: 1) A start-up for a "few" employees is not really economical for many service providers. They should be prepared for "above average" costs; 2) Assets need to be held within the jurisdiction of U.S. District Courts. That generally means the situs of the trust is in the U.S. which generally means a U.S. based trustee; 3) Choice of plan sponsor might be of concern as well. The one's I've done had a "U.S." subsidiary (a corporation based in the U.S.) which employs the U.S. based employees. That makes it easy - make the U.S. sub the sponsor. If not (and just having an EIN doesn't mean they do), there are some interesting legal and fiduciary issues that may be impacted by Canadian law that the company should investigate with international counsel (one versed in both Canadian law and ERISA); finally, the plan should be drafted very carefully to ensure only the intended employees are included - especially if people bounce across the border occasionally.

It's unfortunate, but now you'd probably have to ask someone when (or how) they obtained their designations when you interview them for open positions. Having taken and passed the CPC, QPA, and QKA, there are areas of competence that would be implied for candidates with the same credentials. Heck, even if we don't know the answers, we'll know where to look (or at least there's a question that should be asked). The ERPA material simply did not engage any thoughts on those levels. It appeared to be written at a level of a take-home test. The key is that industry is always going to be divided into two groups: 1) those to study to learn, and by learning they are able to pass the tests to earn the designations; and 2) those to remember enough material to pass the test and earn a designation. You get enough people in group 2 that get the designation and stop learning will tarnish the credentials. I am a fan of anyone advancing their knowledge bases, but believe a free ride on the credential will make the community weaker. A good thing is that we have these types of boards to exchange ideas. There are some heavy hitters here

Agreed that giving away the QPA designation to ERPAs is silly. As a long time CPC/QPA/QKA and a recent ERPA, I can testify that the ERPA exams are a joke compared to the QPA exams, and not just on the DB side.

I have all of these designations and I do not think that a QPA should be awarded with the ERPA exam. The material includes some DB info but nothing extensive. I took the DB exam required to receive your QPA, and it covers much more. I think ASPPA included the QPA with the ERPA designation to attract more applicants. Definitely not fair to the QPAs who took DC3 and DC4 to achieve that designation.

Wow - I did not know that the ERPA designation allows you to forego all the QPA exams? I have my QPA...does that mean I can forego the ERPA exams? (tongue in cheek)