Search the News Archive

State Law Reporting and Disclosure Mandates Under ERISA

20 pages. "ERISA permits a state-law reporting or disclosure mandate that implements a state law that is not otherwise preempted, but only to the extent the mandate is needed for the effective administration of such state law. ERISA preempts all other reporting and disclosure mandates. This article uses those principles to answer the question, 'Which State-Law Reporting and Disclosure Mandates Does ERISA Permit that Relate to State Criminal Laws, Insurance Laws, Health Care Laws, Tax Laws, Domestic Relations Laws, Labor Laws, or Other State Laws?' "

Questions of Justice and Law Raised When an ERISA Plan Beneficiary Strangles His Grandmother, the Participant, to Death

"A young man, Christopher Jackson, strangled to death his grandmother, Rosemarie Little ... who had chosen Christopher to receive part of her death benefits under her employer's 401(k) plan and life insurance plan. Earlier this year a federal court decided that Christopher was entitled to none of Rosemarie's life insurance benefits, and next year a federal court will determine whether he is entitled to any of her 401(k) plan benefits. This article suggests that depriving Christopher of Rosemarie's death benefits may be unjust, may be prohibited by ERISA, and may cause the [employer's] 401(k) plan to lose its tax-qualification.... The Code makes no exception for payments made pursuant to a court order, such as the one the [employer's] plan is seeking in the interpleader action it initiated."

Which State Law Reporting, Recordkeeping and Disclosure Mandates Does ERISA Permit that Relate to State Criminal, Insurance, Healthcare, Tax, Domestic Relations, Labor or Other State Laws?

71 pages. "ERISA permits a state-law reporting or disclosure mandate directed at an ERISA plan, a plan participant or beneficiary, a plan sponsor or contributing employer, or a third party interacting with an ERISA plan, such as a service provider, that implements a state law that ERISA does not otherwise preempt, but only to the extent the mandate is needed for the effective administration of such state law.... Preemption is unaffected by whether the mandate arises from a law that explicitly refers to ERISA. Plan sponsors must comply with all state-law mandates that ERISA does not preempt regardless of plan terms. On the other hand, plan administrators must comply with all state-law mandates with which plan terms require compliance."

Federal Life Insurance Rules Preempt State Law

"The Supreme Court recently decided ... that the federal laws governing a life insurance program for federal employees preempt a state equitable remedy. The decision suggests that a state law ownership claim, whether based on domestic relations law (other than one complying with plan terms), contract law, property disposition on death law, a court order, or other equitable principles, is preempted if it attempts to limit the ability of a participant in a plan governed by [ERISA] to choose beneficiaries, or the right of a beneficiary chosen by the participant under the plan terms to receive and keep those designated benefits.... These ERISA and FERS conclusions are supported by the ringing endorsement of [this case] and its reasoning in the Court's majority opinion of United States v. Windsor."

Supreme Court Disregards ERISA and Goes Further Astray in Applying Bankruptcy Law to Retirement Assets

"The Court's implicit addition of the phrase 'debtor's created' at the start of the exemption is based on its unexamined assumption that otherwise the phrase, 'Retirement funds to the extent that those funds are in,' would be rendered 'superfluous.' ... The phrase 'retirement funds to the extent that those funds are in' has a significance without the addition of any words that is consistent with the legislative history of the phrase, the other bankruptcy provisions, and ERISA.... Under this analysis the bankruptcy fund protection would be available to the participants and beneficiaries of such non-ERISA pension plans." [Clark v. Rameker, No. 13-299 (U.S. June 12, 2014)]

When Do State Laws Determine ERISA Plan Benefit Rights?

Includes a link to the full 256-page paper. Excerpt: "[This] article proposes that three principles may be used to decide when state benefit laws determine ERISA benefit rights. First, ERISA permits state laws that do not diminish or enhance (a) ERISA benefit entitlements; (b) ERISA enforcement mechanisms; or (c) ERISA mandates. Second, ERISA preempts any state law that diminishes or enhances any of these ERISA protections unless the diminution or enhancement was needed to implement a state law that is not otherwise preempted ... Third, a law is not otherwise preempted if the law [1] is described in an implicit or explicit exclusion from the ERISA General Preemption Rule, or [2] does not diminish or enhance any of the three above benefit protections other than with a reporting or disclosure mandate that is used to implement the law. Neither the courts nor other commentators have thoroughly explored these principles."

State Tax Laws Withstand Most ERISA Preemption Challenges

"Gobeille and the Sixth Circuit reaffirmance [of Self-Insurance Inst. of America v. Snyder] suggest that ERISA permits a wide variety of state tax laws to be applied to ERISA plans, their third-party administrators and other service providers, including the reporting and record-keeping requirements used to enforce those laws."

When May an Agent Act on Behalf of an ERISA Plan Participant or Beneficiary?

"State law may authorize an individual to be the agent of an ERISA plan participant or beneficiary. This article discusses when ERISA permits such an individual, on behalf of the agent's principal, to: [1] pursue a benefit claim; [2] obtain plan or benefit information; [3] determine the time and form of benefit payment; [4] determine to whom the plan makes a benefit payment; [5] make beneficiary designations; ... [and take various other actions]. The article also discusses when ERISA and [HIPAA] permit a state-law agent to make healthcare decisions for the agent's principal in ERISA healthcare plans, or obtain information from a healthcare plan[.]"

Analysis of the Supreme Court 'Gobeille' Filings on Whether Vermont May Compel an ERISA Plan to File Health Care Claims Data

"This article analyzes the legal arguments presented by filings about why ERISA permits or prohibits the burden of complying with the Vermont statute, and how this resembles or differs from other state-law administrative burdens.... If the Court and the parties continue on the Court's current preemption path, the Court is likely to increase the incoherence of the Court's preemption principles and their discrepancy from the ERISA statute." [Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., (2d Cir. Feb. 4, 2014, oral argument Dec. 2, 2015)]

Disregard of Reality in the Supreme Court Oral Argument About Whether Vermont May Compel an ERISA Plan to File Health-Care Claims Data

"Gobeille may force the Supreme Court to present a set of rules that determine which state-law reporting and record-keeping benefit payment mandates ERISA preempts, and which ERISA permits. In short, which burdens, if any, does ERISA permit such mandates to impose. The article proposes several different approaches to make such a determination for the benefit payment mandates that could affect more than 147 million participants in ERISA health-care reimbursement plans."