"The Ninth Circuit reasoned that the amended contract was a prohibited transaction under ERISA Section 406(a)(1)(C) because the recordkeeper was a 'party in interest' and the expansion of that party's role with, and compensation received from, the plan involved 'furnishing of goods, services, or facilities between the plan and a party in interest.' And the Ninth Circuit concluded that it could not enforce the 'reasonable compensation' exemption at this point in the case, because the fiduciaries failed to take into account revenue that the recordkeeper had received from third parties." [Bugielski v. AT&T Servs., Inc., No. 21-56196 (9th Cir. Aug. 4, 2023)]

MORE >>