How Much is that (Investment) in the Window…A Higher Level of Fiduciary Oversight Could be Required for 401(k) Plan Brokerage Windows

/in , , , , , , , , ,

by Brenda Berg

Fiduciaries of 401(k) plans and other retirement plans know that they must prudently monitor the investment options available to participants in the plan, but are they monitoring participants’ investments made through a plan’s brokerage window? Recent commentary from the Department of Labor (DOL) on cryptocurrency investments suggests maybe fiduciaries should be – and that the DOL may check in on that soon.[i]

A “brokerage window” or “self-directed brokerage account” can allow participants access to a broad array of investments beyond the regular investment menu under the plan. Most plan fiduciaries have not paid much attention to the actual brokerage window investments. This is not surprising given the DOL’s relative lack of focus on the matter. The DOL had issued guidance in 2012 that the investment disclosure portion of the fee disclosure rules could apply to brokerage window investments in certain cases but after pushback due to the administrative burdens, the DOL withdrew that guidance. In 2014 the DOL issued a Request for Information about brokerage window practices but no further guidance was issued. Read more

Can’t Touch This … DOL Discourages Plans From Investing in Cryptocurrency

/in , , , , , ,

by Becky Achten

Among the many phrases of ERISA, one that is familiar to investment fiduciaries is the requirement to choose investments with the care, skill, prudence, and diligence that a prudent person who is familiar with such matters would use. Recently the Department of Labor (DOL) issued guidance on how this prudence standard applies to fiduciaries who offer cryptocurrency investment alternatives to participants.

In Compliance Assistance Release 2022-01, the DOL reminds fiduciaries of their important role in selecting investments for participant direction. Plan fiduciaries must evaluate each investment option made available to participants to ensure they are prudent. Failure to remove an imprudent investment is a breach of duty. Read more

Bye Bye Bye . . . Or Not. Rehiring Retirees in Pay Status

/in , , ,

by Leslie Thomson

If your qualified pension plan does not provide for in-service distributions and has commenced benefit distributions to a retiree who experienced a bona fide retirement, the IRS says your plan may be able to rehire that retiree and let him or her continue to receive benefit payments upon rehire. Read more

The Tide is High…Keep Holding On For More Retirement Plan Fee Litigation

/in , , , , , , , ,

by Brenda Berg

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling this week in Hughes v. Northwestern University will do nothing to stem the rising tide of retirement plan fee litigation. But the ruling doesn’t mean fiduciary breach claims are more likely to be successful either. Instead, the Court kept its ruling very narrow: a broad investment menu with some prudent funds will not automatically mean the fiduciaries are off the hook for offering imprudent funds.

 

The plaintiffs in Hughes were participants in two 403(b) retirement plans sponsored by Northwestern University. The participants brought claims for breach of fiduciary duty against the University, the retirement plan committee, and the individuals who administered the plans. The participants alleged the fiduciaries breached their duty of prudence by: (1) allowing recordkeeping fees that were too high; (2) allowing plan investments with excessive investment fees; and (3) providing participants too many investment options (over 400!) which resulted in participant confusion and poor investment decisions. Read more

Write This Down … Participants Have to Follow the Plan’s Beneficiary Designation Procedures

/in , , , , , , , , , ,

by Elizabeth Nedrow

The principles governing how ERISA plans determine a participant’s beneficiary haven’t changed much since the country singer George Strait sang “Write this down” in 1999. In short, the participant has to write it down … on the forms and following the procedures established by the plan.

Recently we’ve seen several examples of family members of deceased employees who are surprised by the plan’s record of who was designated as beneficiary. They have tried to argue that the deceased employee’s will should be allowed to designate a beneficiary, or that the plan should look to state laws regarding estates. However, the courts have clearly established that those extraneous sources do not affect the plan’s process. (Most famous are the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2001 Egelhoff decision, and its 2009 Kennedy v. DuPont decision.) Read more

Here I Go Again in the Plan…Treatment of Rehired Employees

/in , , ,

by Benjamin Gibbons

As a result of the current labor shortage that many employers are currently faced with, more and more companies are finding themselves rehiring former employees.  If those former employees previously participated in an employer’s 401(k) plan prior to their severance from employment, such employers should review their 401(k) plan documents to see how such rehired employees are treated under those plans. Read more

Oh Won’t You Stay…A Little Bit Longer…Because There’s No Need to Sign Your Distribution Form in Person

/in , , , ,

by Elizabeth Nedrow and Becky Achten

In June 2020, the IRS issued Notice 2020-42 providing temporary relief from the physical presence requirement for certain participant distribution and beneficiary designation elections required to be witnessed by a notary public or plan representative.  This temporary relief was scheduled to expire June 30, 2021, and now has again been extended by the IRS.

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, the IRS issued Notice 2021-40, again extending the temporary relief through the 12-month period ending June 30, 2022, as long as the prior requirements are met.  See our January 25, 2021 blog posting for a summary of the requirements. Read more

Once in a Lifetime – Make that a Year – for Lifetime Income Illustrations of 401(k) Plan Benefits

/in , , , , , , ,

by Brenda Berg

Plan sponsors of defined contribution plans such as 401(k) plans will soon have to provide participants with illustrations of just how much a participant’s account balance might produce on a monthly basis if converted to a single life annuity and, for married participants, a qualified joint and survivor annuity. Many plan sponsors already provide some sort of income illustration on their quarterly benefit statements to help participants with their retirement planning.

Read more

Time Has Come Today…For Form 5500 Season

/in , , , , , , ,

By Benjamin Gibbons

Days are getting longer, temperatures are getting warmer, plants are looking greener, schools are letting out, Brood X cicadas are emerging…it can only mean one thing…5500 season is approaching.

However, unlike the cicadas and their 17-year cycle, the Form 5500 filing requirements arise every summer for calendar year-end ERISA covered retirement plans and health and welfare plans that cover at least 100 participants.  While it may be easy enough to file an extension and hit the snooze button until October, now is great time for plan sponsors to start thinking about their 5500 obligations. Read more

Hello. Is It Me You’re Looking For? Missing Participant Best Practices

/in , , ,

by Leslie Thomson

The Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) has developed a list of best practices plan fiduciaries can implement to reduce missing participant issues and ensure participants and beneficiaries receive their plan benefits. According to EBSA, the first step in addressing any problem is knowing there is one. If your plan has one or more of the following “red flags,” you potentially have a missing participant issue:

  • More than a small number of missing or nonresponsive participants.
  • More than a small number of terminated vested participants who have reached normal retirement age but have not started receiving their pension benefits.
  • Missing, inaccurate, or incomplete contact information, census data, or both (e.g., incorrect or out-of-date mail, email, and other contact information, partial social security numbers, missing birthdates, or missing spousal information).
  • Absence of sound policies and procedures for handling mail returned marked “return to sender,” “wrong address,” “addressee unknown,” or otherwise, and undeliverable email.
  • Absence of sound policies and procedures for handling uncashed checks (as reflected for example, by the absence of an accounting journal or similar record of uncashed checks, a substantial number of stale uncashed distribution checks, or failure to reclaim stale uncashed check funds in distribution accounts).

Read more