"Most plan sponsors rely upon one of two pre-existing DOL electronic disclosure safe harbors in order to facilitate their electronic delivery of participant benefit statements.... With respect to plan sponsors relying upon the 2002 Safe Harbor, the Prop Regs require the provision of a one-time paper notice to employees who first become eligible for the plan at issue on or after January 1, 2026.... Since the 2020 Safe Harbor did not previously include an affirmative election requirement, plan sponsors that want to avoid the Paper Requirement will need to determine the best way to solicit participant elections for electronic delivery."  MORE >>

"You can allow participants to elect not to receive the paper statements. But it requires careful coordination and tracking. The plan sponsor or its provider responsible for distributing statements must track the participant population and whether the participant receives paper or electronic statements. (Yes, this is a breeding ground for mistakes if proper records aren't kept.)"  MORE >>

"[Technical Release 2026-01] represents a notable expansion of the Department's engagement with the evolving state-law landscape surrounding ESG-related proxy voting regulation.... The Release creates a challenge for proxy advisory firms because, in arguing that these state rules are not preempted by ERISA, the Department suggests that any firm that makes a disclosure of nonfinancial proxy voting under a state law with respect to ERISA assets would be violating ERISA."  MORE >>

"While this holding eliminates one way employers can dispute withdrawal liability determinations, it primarily affects the relatively rare situation where a pension fund changes its assumptions retroactively and an employer withdraws in that year. It will, however, have the effect of making withdrawal liability less predictable and withdrawal liability estimates less reliable." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]   MORE >>

"After this decision, employers generally cannot argue that assumptions are invalid just because they were adopted after the measurement date; instead, they must focus on whether the assumptions are reasonable and consistent with the fund's experience." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"The unanimous decision ... resolved a split among the circuit courts as to whether the plans' actuaries must set assumptions before the measurement date or may do so afterward based on information available as of that date. The decision should settle at least one contentious aspect of withdrawal liability calculations for multiemployer plans across the country." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]   MORE >>

"[T]he Eleventh Circuit held that ERISA requires that, in making a qualified joint and survivor annuity conversion and in calculating the charge for a qualified pre-retirement survivor annuity, actuarial assumptions (in this case, mortality assumptions) must be reasonable. The court also found that failure to use reasonable assumptions constituted an impermissible forfeiture." [Drummond v. Southern Company, No. 24-12773 (11th cir. May 26, 2026)]  MORE >>

"The planning question is not simply whether after-tax contributions are allowed. It is whether they are workable for the employer's workforce, payroll system, recordkeeper, and compliance profile. For some plans, especially those with broad employee interest and strong recordkeeping support, after-tax contributions can be a valuable savings feature. For other plans, particularly closely held businesses with low rank-and-file participation, they may create more frustration than benefit."  MORE >>

"For advisors and plan sponsors evaluating how to enhance long-term, risk-adjusted returns within a defined contribution menu, private equity may offer exposure to a different growth profile than public markets alone. That said, expanded access does not eliminate risk, and inclusion comes with important considerations."  MORE >>

"The TrumpIRA has no mandatory features, at least in part because it stems from an executive order lacking statutory authority to require anyone’s participation. Could it make a significant dent in the coverage gap without mandatory participation? That might depend on how enticing the refundable Saver’s Match turns out to be."  MORE >>

17 pages. "[ARA recommends] that the Department: [1] Provide additional context to clarify how the proposed rule aligns with the existing prudence regulation ... [2] Clarify the interaction of a fiduciary's plan menu strategy decision and a fiduciary's selection of a DIA ... [3] Further mitigate frivolous ERISA litigation by addressing monitoring in the final rule and more explicitly defining certain key concepts ... and [4] Refine certain provisions relating to the safe harbor[.]"  MORE >>

"The SPARK Institute offers the following recommendations. [1] Clarify safe harbor provisions are only a safe harbor ... [2] Clarify scope of presumption and deference ... [3] Clarify impact of factors beyond the six safe harbor factors ... [4] Do not add safe harbor factors ... [5] Reconsider emphasis on benchmarks ... [6] Reconsider guidance that artificially incentivizes mutual funds over other investments ... [7] De-emphasize conflict-free valuations ... [8] Consider example covering stable value fund selection."  MORE >>

19 pages. "[It] is essential for DOL to make clear that there is no one prudent process, and any factors listed in a final regulation are not the exclusive means by which fiduciaries may meet their prudence obligations.... The language in the preamble and the repeated reference to an ERISA section 3(21)(A) fiduciary in the examples could be interpreted to mean DOL prefers that type of assistance rather than other types, and any other equally appropriate assistance (or lack of assistance if not needed) would not satisfy the requirements in a final regulation."  MORE >>

"The proposed rule will reduce regulatory uncertainty by providing clarity to plan fiduciaries as they consider new plan investments that can help retirement savers invest for a successful retirement.... Fiduciaries should not be forced to operate under the fear that offering a particular asset class will invite hindsight second-guessing and costly, often meritless litigation, even where exposure to these assets can be prudently made available in a DC plan through a professionally managed, diversified investment option."  MORE >>

"[1] The IDR process has allowed providers to weaponize arbitration and must be addressed ... [2] [ERIC encourages] the Department to ... issue a new [MHPAEA] proposed rule ... to ensure employers have the clarity and flexibility they need to offer robust behavioral health benefits for a healthy, productive workforce.... [3] In working with DOL and PBGC ... reduce unneeded notices and simplify current disclosures while still providing important information regarding plan costs and financial literacy."  MORE >>