Get This Daily Newsletter by Email

Retirement Plans Newsletter

January 21, 2026

BenefitsLink.com logo
EmployeeBenefitsJobs.com logo

💼  9 New Job Opportunities

 

[Official Guidance]

Text of PBGC ERISA 4044 Expense Load Factors for 2026

The computation of the 4044 expense loads was changed by PBGC’s final rule ... issued August 15, 2025. The 4044 expense is now computed as specified dollar amounts per participant for the first 100 participants and per additional participant. These dollar amounts will change annually. PBGC has determined the 4044 expense load factors applicable for valuation dates after 1/30/2026 but before 1/31/2027. A new webpage for ERISA 4044 expense load has been created and is now available.  MORE >>

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation [PBGC]

[Sponsor]

Turning Plan Document Review into Actionable Insights - Now Including DB Plans

PlanPort revolutionizes how advisors, recordkeepers, and TPAs use retirement plan documents across their business operations –- delivering efficiency, accuracy, review, and automation like never before. Now supporting 403(b), 457(b) and DB plans!

Sponsored by PlanDataAI LLC

[Guidance Overview]

SECURE 2.0 Retirement Plan Tax Credit Reminders

"SECURE 2.0 expanded the small employer retirement plan startup costs credit.... SECURE 2.0 added ... the employer contribution credit, for certain employer contributions ... An eligible employer may claim a $500 auto-enrollment credit for the first taxable year in which it includes an eligible automatic contribution arrangement (EACA) in a qualified employer plan ... Military spouse participation credit."  MORE >>

Spectrum Consultants

[Guidance Overview]

IRS Releases Updated 402(f) Notice

"[Notice 2026-13] contains updates to the ... section 402(f) mandatory participant notice (AKA the Special Tax Notice) ... There have been a number of changes to the IRC relating to distributions under [SECURE 2.0] ... [If] a participant is receiving a distribution that is part pre-tax and part Roth, both versions of the Notice must be provided. With the new required Roth Catch-up Contributions, most 401(k) and 403(b) plans may need to provide both versions of the Notice more often than in years past. (... Another reason to move to electronic forms.)"  MORE >>

Ferenczy Benefits Law Center

Transcript of Oral Argument Before the U.S. Supreme Court in Case Challenging Calculation of Withdrawal Liability (PDF)

75 pages. "Justice Sotomayor (to counsel for the petitioner): 'Congress knew how to fix the use of assumptions to a particular date. It didn't do it here. Why shouldn't I assume it didn't mean to do that here?' ... Justice Alito (to counsel for the United States, supporting the respondent): 'Have very serious practical problems emerged since Metz or is it simply a matter of the fact that actuaries were used to doing things in a particular way and they don't want to change the way they've been doing it?' " [Also available: audio recording (MP3)] [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 22-7157 (D.C. Cir Feb. 9, 2024; cert. pet. granted Jun. 30, 2025 No. 23-1209; oral arg. Jan. 20, 2026)]  MORE >>

Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court Chooses to Hear Intel

"If the Court affirms the Ninth Circuit's approach and endorses a strict meaningful benchmark requirement, it would make it significantly more difficult for participants to pursue ERISA claims challenging investment decisions beyond the pleading stage. Plan sponsors would benefit from a higher bar for plaintiffs, particularly in defending the selection of investment strategies that incorporate alternatives where truly comparable funds may not exist." [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 >>

Ropes & Gray LLP

Another District Court Sides with Employer in Forfeiture Case

"[The judge] found that the Amazon 401(k) plan expressly allowed fiduciaries to apply forfeitures to reduce employer contributions, pay plan expenses or restore accounts, and that courts have overwhelmingly rejected the theory advanced by the workers." [Curtis v. Amazon.com Services LLC, No. 24-2164 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 16, 2026)]  MORE >>

PLANADVISER

Key Provisions of the Proposed 'ERISA Litigation Reform Act'

"[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 >>

DLA Piper

Technical Aspects of Allowing 401(k) Investments in Personal Residences

"Recent statements ... suggest the White House is considering a proposal to permit savers to invest a portion of their 401(k) retirement accounts in their personal residences.... [I]mplementation would involve myriad technical complications.... [1] Prohibited transactions and fiduciary responsibility ... [2] Structuring the plan's interest in the home ... [3] Execution and timing of investments ... [4] Tax implications ... [5] Valuations -- implications for reporting and distributions ... [6] Special situations: foreclosure, bankruptcy, and liability."  MORE >>

American Retirement Association [ARA]

Rollovers Hit $1 Trillion as Workers Move to Employer Plans

"U.S households moved an estimated $1 trillion in retirement plan rollovers in 2025 ... [O]ne in eight rollover transactions, or 16%, are over $100,000. Rollovers in new employer plans have doubled in dollars terms, at $160 billion today compared to $80 billion in 2022."  MORE >>

401(k) Specialist

[Opinion]

Why the 'Meaningful Benchmark' Standard Is a Judicial Illusion Built for Wall Street

"There is no statute that requires a 'meaningful benchmark.' ERISA's prudence standard focuses on process, not performance relative to a counterfactual benchmark. Benchmarks were a judicial convenience, not a substantive legal test."  MORE >>

The Commonsense 401(k) Project

[Opinion]

Estimating the Short-Term Revenue Effects of Overall Limits on Exceptionally Large Retirement Accounts

"[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 >>

The Brookings Institution

Benefits in General

[Guidance Overview]

Planning for Your Next DOL Investigation Just Got Easier

"EBSA stated that its investigations will continue to evaluate how plans and service providers protect against cybersecurity threats.... [T]he Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act and its 2013 regulations, as well as the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, remain ... an enforcement priority.... EBSA will be focusing enforcement efforts on the implementation of the No Surprises Act ... EBSA will be reviewing pension plan practices to notify participants who are approaching normal retirement age and required minimum distribution age[.]"  MORE >>

Proskauer

Employee Benefits Jobs

💼

DC Retirement Plan Administrator

Michigan Pension & Actuarial Services, LLC

Farmington MI / Hybrid

View job as DC Retirement Plan Administrator for Michigan Pension & Actuarial Services, LLC

💼

Consulting Actuary

Strongpoint Partners

Remote

View job as Consulting Actuary for Strongpoint Partners

💼

Combo Retirement Plan Administrator

Strongpoint Partners

Remote

View job as Combo Retirement Plan Administrator for Strongpoint Partners

💼

Distribution Reviewer

Nova 401(k) Associates

Remote

View job as Distribution Reviewer for Nova 401(k) Associates

💼

Census Coordinator

BPAS

Utica NY

View job as Census Coordinator for BPAS

💼

Retirement Plan Processor

BPAS

Utica NY

View job as Retirement Plan Processor for BPAS

💼

Lead Transition Consultant - Retirement Plans

Ameritas

Remote

View job as Lead Transition Consultant - Retirement Plans for Ameritas

💼

Lead Account and Client Consultant - Retirement Plans

Ameritas

Remote / Lincoln NE

View job as Lead Account and Client Consultant - Retirement Plans for Ameritas

💼

Retirement Plan Administrator

Growing TPA

Remote / Orland Park IL

Selected New Discussions

Exclude Some But Not All Union Employees?

"We've known that our client NR is in a controlled group with RR (has their own plan but not our client) for several years, and we actually get the RR data every other year or so to prove that it passes 410b for all the various BRF, which it does. We've convinced the owners to let us take over the RR plan, and as part of the discussion they mentioned the RR plan includes union employees (they were included in the data we received, but not identified as such). NR's plan excludes union employees, and there are union employees that are excluded. They want to keep the two plans separate (getting close to the audit threshold, don't want a conversion, etc.). Is this union thing going to be a problem for coverage? I'd like to think that since we can exclude all union employees, it's OK to include some class of them."

BenefitsLink® Message Boards

May a Qualified Calendar-Year Plan Allocate a Year's Contribution Only Among Those Employed the Next February 15?

"I'm wondering whether a Section 401(a)-qualified retirement plan may provide an allocation condition that, instead of looking to the last day of each plan year, instead uses a somewhat later date, a little after a year closes. For example, to share in a nonelective contribution declared for 2027 and allocated in relation to participants' 2027 compensation, the participant would need to be employed on February 15, 2028. ... 

"Assumptions: The employer's accounting and tax year is the calendar year. The plan's plan year and limitation year are the calendar year. The plan uses no safe-harbor regime to meet any coverage, nondiscrimination, or top-heavy condition. The plan never has had difficulty meeting these conditions. Of those participants who might not share in a nonelective contribution (if one is declared for a year) because the allocation-condition is the next February 15 rather than the last day of the year, that effect cuts against highly-compensated participants. (For the business and workforces involved, the executives are mobile and the nonexecutive workers are rooted.) And for further reasons, the employer is not the least bit worried about nondiscrimination.

"The plan sponsor could change from using IRS-preapproved documents to an individually-designed plan. Questions: What qualified-plan rules, beyond nondiscrimination, are involved? What am I missing? Are there reasons beyond tax law why an employer should not do this?"

BenefitsLink® Message Boards

Press Releases

Industry Veterans Launch The Judi Group, the First Health Benefits Advisory Firm Focused on Fiduciary Compliance, Cost Control, and Plan Oversight for Employers

Judi Health

Webinars, Podcasts and Conferences
(Retirement Plans / Executive Compensation)

The Withdrawal Liability Lifecycle

PODCAST

Proskauer

IRA Reporting Requirements

March 24, 2026 WEBINAR

Ascensus

Last Issue's Most Popular Items

SECURE 2.0's New Roth Catch-Up Contribution Rule

John Hancock

Employer-Funded 'Portable Benefit Accounts' Now Available for Alabama Independent Contractors

Burr & Forman

Major ERISA Reform Bill Moves Forward

The Wagner Law Group

Unsubscribe  |   Change Email Address

Search Past Issues   |   Privacy Policy

Submit an Article   |   Contact Us   |   Advertise Here

Copyright 2026 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.