"While details remain to be seen, it is believed that President Trump may consider reviving the MyRA program first introduced by President Barack Obama ... in 2014. Billed as 'starter' accounts with Roth IRA-like tax advantages, MyRAs were aimed at helping workers begin saving for retirement.... A revamped version could potentially be paired with the Saver's Match -- a federal matching contribution set to debut in 2027 for low- to moderate-income workers established under SECURE 2.0." MORE >>
"EBSA established the Employee Ownership Initiative and built a solid foundation for future programs in less than two years ... DEO built relationships with a wide range of federal, state, industry, and community stakeholders; spoke at events and generated articles and blogs; advised state partners and employers; and created a website to educate the public about employee ownership, employee participation, and related state programs." MORE >>
"While insurance regulation is technically state-based, the NAIC writes the model laws, develops solvency standards, drafts accounting rules, and coordinates national policy. State regulators almost uniformly adopt NAIC models.... Which means this private, membership-based organization effectively shapes the rules governing: [1] Trillions in life insurance reserves; [2] Over $2 trillion in individual annuity reserves; [3] The solvency standards protecting retirees; [4] The accounting treatment of general account assets; [5] The risk-based capital formulas that determine whether insurers survive or fail. And yet, for something that central, transparency has lagged far behind modern expectations." MORE >>
"Australia’s Superannuation model, while structurally more sustainable due to its asset-backed design, exposes participants to investment, market, and economic-cycle risks that are largely absent from traditional defined-benefit social insurance systems. Any serious consideration of transitioning the United States from a pay-as-you-go model toward a Superannuation-style system must therefore address significant challenges related to transition financing, sequencing, risk allocation, and intergenerational equity." MORE >>
"[T]he court reversed the district court's denial of IBC's motion to compel arbitration as to Parrott's Section 1132(a)(2) claim because the plan's unilateral amendment was lawful and applied to Parrott, but affirmed as to Parrott's individual claims under Section 1132(a)(3) because he did not give consent. Furthermore, the court voided the standard of review provision 'to the extent it purports to reach breach-of-fiduciary-duty claims,' and remanded 'for further proceedings on whether provisions that violate the effective vindication doctrine can be severed.' " [Parrott v. International Bancshares Corp., No. 25-50367 (5th Cir. Feb. 10, 2026)] MORE >>
"Australia's system is highly ranked in international comparisons -- receiving a grade of B+ and the U.S. only a C+. The U.S. receives low grades mainly because Social Security is not adequately financed and many workers have no workplace retirement program. To improve our grade, we must fix Social Security and give all workers access to supplementary plans. Good as it is, Australia can't help us." MORE >>
"[T]he Fifth Circuit held that the arbitration clause in the company's defined contribution retirement plan violated the effective vindication doctrine because it prohibited participants from asserting claims in a representative capacity on behalf of the plan, which the Court explained 'is facially at odds with the statutory text' of ERISA Section 409 'and the remedy it provides.' The arbitration clause was also unenforceable because it only permitted participants to obtain individualized relief in arbitration rather than plan-wide relief.... [A table] lists the federal appellate courts that have applied the effective vindication doctrine in holding that an ERISA plan arbitration clause was unenforceable." [Parrott v. International Bancshares Corp., No. 25-50367 (5th Cir. Feb. 10, 2026)] MORE >>
"Over the last decade, a line of US Supreme Court decisions ... have pushed fiduciary risk away from a focus on investment results and squarely onto the quality of the process and the paper trail that supports it. Together with regulatory guidance, these cases send a simple message: Under ERISA, prudence is a living, documented process, not a scoreboard of quarterly returns." MORE >>
"[T]he [DOL] recently filed its fourth amicus brief supporting employers in 401(k) forfeiture disputes.... The DOL's active involvement in these cases is good news for plan sponsors. These types of suits, which challenge acts permitted under current law, are designed simply to force a quick 'nuisance' settlement. It is the hope that the DOL's continued support and legal involvement will curb these suits quickly." MORE >>
"In all four of its amicus curia briefs, the DOL has explained its position that, where a plan allows forfeitures to be used to offset employer contributions or pay plan expenses, there is no breach of fiduciary duty where a plan fiduciary decides to use forfeitures to offset employer contributions." MORE >>
"The EBSA's position falsely suggests that fiduciary prudence is an either-or proposition, while fiduciary prudence under ERISA actually requires consideration of both procedural and substantive prudence.This analysis argues that an exclusive focus on proceduralism is inconsistent with ERISA's legislative history, ignores the dual nature of fiduciary prudence, and creates a regulatory environment that favors the insurance industry over plan participants and at the expense of both plan participants and their beneficiaries." MORE >>
"[EBSA] filed four friend-of-the-court briefs in circuit courts alone in January, putting it on track to outpace the number the agency has filed in recent years.... The DOL is on track to easily outpace the seven briefs it put out in 2016, the most it filed annually in ERISA cases over the past ten years[.]" MORE >>
"Individual plan participants entangled in 401(k) excessive-fee and investment-underperformance lawsuits had a median recovery of just $67.79 in 2025, even as law firms representing plaintiffs averaged $1.59 million per case in fees ... While supporters of such complaints argue that litigation (and the threat of litigation) deter misconduct and force better plan practices, critics say the figures show workers gain little, while employers face mounting costs that ultimately shrink retirement benefits and plan services." MORE >>
"The [DOL's amicus brief], which argued the Lockheed retirees lack standing to challenge the company's pension de-risking transaction, is inconsistent with [ERISA] and would undermine the statute's standards by 'insulating fiduciary conduct from review precisely when judicial oversight is most needed,' Phyllis Borzi and Ali Khawar told the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in a Jan. 30 amicus brief backing the Lockheed workers." [Konya v. Lockheed Martin Corp., No. 24-0750 (D. Md. Mar. 28, 2025; on appeal to 4th Cir. No. 25-2061)] MORE >>
"Some retirement savers might experience life-altering losses if retirement plan sponsors and advisers steer them into risky and hard-to-value investments like private equity and cryptocurrencies....[P]rivately traded investments ... may be difficult to sell when workers are ready for retirement and digital collectibles ... have no intrinsic value ... Marketing risky investments to millions of retirement plan participants is a way to bail out billionaires at the expense of ordinary savers ... A speculative bubble like the one in the roaring 1920s might grow and lead to a crash with economywide repercussions." MORE >>
"Amicus briefs are not binding law, but neither are they merely they symbolic. Until regulatory guidance is issued, some key takeaways include the following: [1] A signal to the plaintiffs' bar ... [2] A brief from the Solicitor General on behalf of the DOL can shape outcomes, even if the Supreme Court ultimately does not take the case.... [3] The DOL's new posture suggests that process and judgment should get more deference.... [4] The briefs telegraph where the DOL is heading on formal rulemaking." MORE >>
"The rule and related amendments to seven prohibited transaction exemptions (PTEs) were originally scheduled to go live on Sept. 23, 2024. The dismissal of DOL's appeal leaves the court orders blocking the rule in place pending resolution of the legal challenges seeking the rule's invalidation. However, the rule is unlikely to take effect in its current form now that DOL has indicated it expects to engage in further rulemaking." MORE >>
"[ERISA Litigation Reform Act (HR 6084)] aims to curb meritless class actions by clarifying the pleading standard applicable to ERISA-prohibited transactions claims. The reform effort comes in response to recent litigation trends and the United States Supreme Court's decision in Cunningham v. Cornell last year, which effectively lowered the pleading standard for prohibited transaction claims under ERISA." MORE >>
"[E]liminating tax-deductible contributions for retirement accounts that already contain at least $5 or $10 million would raise very little revenue on an immediate basis (less than $0.15 billion per year or $0.05 billion per year, respectively).... [In] contrast, requiring immediate disgorgement of excess balances would raise larger amounts of revenue on an immediate basis -- $84 billion for accounts in excess of $5 million, or $11 billion if the limit were set at $10 million. In all the examples, however, future revenue would change depending on rates of return, future tax rates, and the timing of distributions that would have been taken in the absence of the policy." MORE >>
"[T]he Protecting Prudent Investment of Retirement Savings Act (HR 2988) ... would significantly restrict the consideration of non‑pecuniary factors in retirement plan investing.... It would also impose new nondiscrimination rules for service provider selection, tighten fiduciary obligations with respect to proxy voting, and require enhanced disclosures for brokerage windows." MORE >>
"Because ERISA is a remedial statute grounded in trust law, and because fiduciaries exclusively control the information necessary to assess causation, the burden of proof on causation properly rests with the fiduciary once a breach and loss are shown. Any contrary rule would undermine ERISA's core purpose, reward informational asymmetry, and render fiduciary duties unenforceable in practice. So, the obvious question is -- why would the EBSA submit an amicus brief that is totally inconsistent with legal precedent and tries to burden plan participants with an impossible task[.]" [Pizarro v. Home Depot,No. 22-13643 (11th Cir. Aug. 2, 2024;cert. pet. filedDec. 3, 2024;motion to dismissfiled Jan. 7, 2026)]MORE >>
"The Intel case is not about whether private equity is 'good' or 'bad.' It is about whether ERISA fiduciaries can hide the governing investment contracts, invent benchmarks, and still claim compliance with the strictest fiduciary law in the country. If Intel prevails, the consequences will not stop with private equity. They will extend directly to target-date funds, annuities, private credit, and any opaque product that depends on secrecy to survive scrutiny." [Anderson v. Intel Corp. Inv. Policy Comm., No. 22-16268 (9th Cir. May 22, 2025; cert. pet. granted Jan 16, 2026, No. 25-498)] MORE >>
"The [ERISA Litigation Reform Act (HR 6084)] would impose a stay on discovery once a defendant files a motion to dismiss under Rule 12 in any action against a plan or its fiduciaries under Section 502. The stay would be automatic unless the court finds that particularized discovery is necessary to preserve evidence or prevent undue prejudice. The bill would also impose document preservation obligations during the pendency of the stay." MORE >>
"Current proposals focus on practical improvements such as streamlining plan administration, expanding access for younger and independent workers, and introducing greater flexibility in investment and income options.... [This article describes] the retirement bills that have been introduced in this Congress, including what they mean to employers and what plan design decisions may lie ahead." MORE >>
"What we saw in 2025: [1] Supreme Court: lowering the pleading bar for prohibited transaction claims ... [2] Defined benefit plans: evolving pension risk transfer and actuarial equivalence litigation ... [3] Defined contribution plans: expanding fiduciary breach theories ... [4] Health plan litigation: mounting cases even as health plan fiduciaries score wins ... [6] The Trump administration focuses on ERISA ... What [to watch] in 2026: [1] ERISA in the Supreme Court: the meaningful benchmark divide ... [2] ERISA jury trials in the Second Circuit: the saga continues." MORE >>
