|
Retirement Plans Newsletter
July 20, 2023
|
|
4 New Job Opportunities
|
|
[Official Guidance]
Text of PBGC Updated SFA Questions and Answers: Permissible Investments and Withdrawal Liability Condition and Make-up Payments of Previously Suspended Benefits
Updated Jul. 19, 2023, to include two sets of new SFA questions and answers: [1] The Permissible Investments SFA questions and
answers explain and provide examples of permissible investment grade fixed income (IGFI) securities and return-seeking assets (RSA). [2] The Withdrawal Liability Condition and Make-up Payments of Previously Suspended Benefits SFA questions and answers focus on the withdrawal liability condition requiring phase-in of SFA assets. They clarify the calculation methodology for plans that paid make-up payments of previously
suspended benefits. MORE >>
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation [PBGC]
|
[Guidance Overview]
Significant Changes Made to IRS Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System
"Notice 2023-43, provided in a question-and-answer format, is intended to assist taxpayers by
providing interim guidance in advance of an update to Rev. Proc. 2021-30. Notably, the guidance confirms that failures that occurred before SECURE Act 2.0 was enacted on December 29, 2022, may be corrected in accordance with the new rules. The guidance is not comprehensive and does not address the recovery of plan overpayments, correction of automatic contribution errors, or any elements over which the DOL has
authority." MORE >>
The Wagner Law Group
|
[Guidance Overview]
IRS Provides Additional Required Minimum Distribution Relief Following SECURE 2.0 Act Changes
"[Notice 2023-54] provides much-needed 2023 required minimum distributions (RMD) relief by:
[1] Extending the effective date of the final RMD regulations (for all plan types) for another year -- now not effective before the 2024 distribution calendar year; [2] Providing rollover relief to plan sponsors and participants/IRA owners who were born in 1951 (as well as their surviving spouses) -- which includes extending the rollover period through September 30, 2023; and [3] Eliminating the need for 2023
RMD payments for beneficiaries under the combination of the 10-year rule and the 'at least as rapidly' rule." MORE >>
Groom Law Group
|
[Guidance Overview]
IRS Provides Transition Relief and Guidance for Required Minimum Distributions Under SECURE and SECURE 2.0 Acts
"The short-term relief relating to the change in the required beginning date under the SECURE 2.0 Act is of special importance to plan administrators because it obviates the need for mandatory withholding and section 402(f) notices for distributions mistakenly treated as
RMDs rather than eligible rollover distributions." MORE >>
Thomson Reuters / EBIA
|
[Guidance Overview]
Trust as IRA Beneficiary: A Potentially Catastrophic Problem
"[E]very trust created prior to the SECURE Act and named as an IRA beneficiary must be reviewed, potentially rewritten, or scrapped altogether. What was a perfectly effective planning strategy a couple of years ago could be totally useless now. Here's how and
why." MORE >>
Slott Report
|
Fourth Circuit Addresses Cross-Selling by Plan Investment Consultants
"Does a plan investment consultant breach fiduciary duties when it sells other investment services to the plan? And does a delegated fiduciary act disloyally or imprudently when it selects a proprietary investment fund for the plan? ... [T]he U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit addressed both questions and ... [upheld] the district court's judgment in favor of Aon Hewitt Investment Consulting, Inc. that it did not breach its ERISA duties of prudence or loyalty when serving as an investment consultant and as the delegated fiduciary to the Lowe's Home Improvement 401(k) Plan." [Reetz v. Aon Hewitt Investment Consulting Inc., No. 21-2267 (4th Cir., July 17, 2023)] MORE >>
Miller & Chevalier
|
Fourth Circuit Affirms Aon Hewitt Did Not Breach ERISA Fiduciary Duties in Cross-Selling Services and Managing Lowe's 401(k) Plan
"[T]he court found that Aon was not acting as an ERISA fiduciary when it engaged in cross-selling of additional services at the time that it was recommending that Lowe's restructure its retirement plan.... Second, the court found that Aon did not violate its ERISA fiduciary
duty of loyalty by recommending that the plan adopt a streamlined investment menu which happened to play to its interest." [Reetz v. Aon Hewitt Investment Consulting Inc., No. 21-2267 (4th Cir., July 17, 2023)] MORE >>
Roberts Disability Law
|
New LTPT Employee Rules: Considerations for Recordkeepers, TPAs and Software Vendors (PDF)
"[I]mplementation of these enhancements requires thoughtful planning so as to create the least amount of disruption to users' continued operation of their plans. Timely guidance on unanswered questions is not expected to be forthcoming, making the task of producing timely
updates even more difficult for software vendors. All service providers will be forced to make good-faith efforts to apply the rules in their services and software. Still, certain updates may be delayed as we await guidance." MORE >>
ASC, via Plan Consultant magazine
|
EBSA Mulls Modifying PRT Rules
"At the hearing, ... commonly recommended modifications informed by changes to the insurance market since 1995 ... included: [1] consideration of the ownership structure and business model of the insurance company, [2] the insurer's use of re-insurance,
and [3] the insurer's use of off-shore and arbitrage strategies. The investment portfolio of the insurance company, already required to be considered under IB 95-1, was also highlighted by multiple speakers as an essential consideration." MORE >>
planadviser
|
Update on the Debate Over Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance Investing
"The debate over investment of retirement plan funds based on environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) factors continues to make waves. This post provides a high-level overview of the current state of play for plans that are subject to ERISA." MORE >>
Verrill Dana LLP
|
[Opinion]
In Yale University ERISA Case, Plaintiffs Lose But Seventh Amendment Wins
"Until now, all courts before which the matter reached trial ... have read the Supreme Court's precedent holding monetary damages to be legal damages narrowly, because that case dealt with a suit by a fiduciary against a non‐fiduciary. These courts have instead applied
the 'previously available in equity' test strictly, holding that the collection sought in these cases is surcharge, an exclusively equitable remedy. These reeds are too thin, though, for the denial of a constitutional right, as the court in Yale rightly held." MORE >>
Cato Institute
|
Employee Benefits Jobs |
|
|
|
|
|
Selected New Discussions |
SECURE Act: LTPT Employees
"Plan has immediate eligibility. However, Part Time and Seasonal Employees are excluded. Obviously if the employee in these groups complete 1,000, they were eligible for the plan. There seems to be different opinions if the LTPT rule applies to groups specially excluded from the
plan. Question, if the plan specially excludes a group (part time and/or seasonal/interns etc.), does the new LTPT rule apply to this group."
BenefitsLink Message Boards
|
QSLOB Testing with Multiple Plans
"I have a client (Company A) that sponsors a 401(k) and a DB plan. A couple of years ago they acquired another company (Company B) that sponsors a 401(k) plan. The transition period funder 410(b)(6) has now expired and they may have a testing issue unless they can obtain QSLOB
status. In testing for QSLOB status, both companies meet the 50 employee requirement and the administrative scrutiny requirements under 414(r). Next up is the Gateway test under 1.414(r)-8 which is causing a potential problem. I believe that each of the 3 plans has to satisfy 410(b)(5)(B) on an employer-wide basis, and can do so by each having a coverage ratio greater than the unsafe harbor percentage. While each of the 401(k) plans satisfy
this requirement, the DB plan unfortunately does not. Based on this, does that mean Company A fails to be a QSLOB based on the DB plan's coverage failure? Or can Company A's 401(k) plan at least be tested on a QSLOB basis since that plan does meet the coverage requirements and the sponsor satisfies all of the other QSLOB requirements. In that case at least we'd be good for the 401(k) plan and the DB plan could then explore other
options (hard freeze or open up to new entrants). A colleague suggested that Company A as a whole could be tested on an employer-wide basis, not each individual plan. The argument being that it's the QSLOB itself that needs to be tested, not the plans of the QSLOB. But that did not sound correct to me. Any suggestions are welcome."
BenefitsLink Message Boards
|
|
Press Releases |
SageView Advisory Group Welcomes Sarah Parker as Retirement Plan Consultant
SageView Advisory Group
|
Katie Selenski Joins DCIIA as Senior Advisor
Defined Contribution Institutional Investment Association [DCIIA]
|
|
Webcasts and Conferences (Retirement Plans / Executive Compensation) |
IRA University
September 27, 2023 WEBINAR
Ascensus
|
|
Last Issue's Most Popular Items |
IRS Provides Transition Relief for Change in Beginning Date for RMDs
Journal of Accountancy
|
Expanding Access to 401(k) Plan Savings for Long-Term Part-Time Employees
Foley & Lardner LLP
|
ERIC and Coalition Partners Seek Relief from New SECURE 2.0 Act Roth Contribution Requirements
The ERISA Industry Committee [ERIC]
|
Unsubscribe |
Change Email Address
Search Past Issues |
Privacy Policy
Submit an Article |
Contact Us |
Advertise Here
Copyright 2023 BenefitsLink.com, Inc. All materials contained in this newsletter are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of BenefitsLink.com, Inc., or in the case of third party materials, the owner of those materials. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notices from copies of the content.
BenefitsLink® Retirement Plans Newsletter, ISSN no. 1536-9587.
Links to web sites other than BenefitsLink.com and EmployeeBenefitsJobs.com are offered as a service to our readers. We are not involved in their production and are not responsible for their content.
|