Proposed Regulations: Normal Retirement Age for Governmental Plans
(Posted on January 27, 2016 by )

On January 27, 2016, the IRS issued proposed regulations governing the extent to which governmental pension plans must comply with the rules governing normal retirement ages. In general, the rules are a positive step from the perspective of governmental plan sponsors, but they contain a few potential pitfalls.

Read more

Economically Targeted Investments: Department of Labor Guidance Leaves Many Questions Open
(Posted on December 7, 2015 by )

On October 22, 2015, the Department of Labor issued new guidance, Interpretive Bulletin 2015-01, relating to the fiduciary standards under ERISA in considering economically targeted investments (“ETIs”), or investments chosen to foster specific social goals, such as economic development and/or home ownership in a particular state or area. What does this guidance mean for fund fiduciaries?

Read more

Domestic Partnership Converted Retroactively to Marriage After Death Provides Basis for Spousal Benefits
(Posted on November 6, 2015 by )

2016 IRS Benefits & Contributions Limits Announced
(Posted on October 30, 2015 by )

On October 30, 2015, the IRS issued IRS Notice 2015-75, announcing the changes in pensions and benefits limits for 2016. Most limits were unchanged. An updated chart, showing these limits for 1996 to 2016, is available by clicking here.

Social Security Wage Base for 2016 Issued
(Posted on October 15, 2015 by )

2016 Supplement to the Governmental Plans Answer Book Published
(Posted on October 6, 2015 by )

The 2016 Supplement to the Third Edition of the Governmental Plans Answer Book has now been published. It reflects substantial new developments in the area over the past year.

Read more

2016 Supplement to the 457 Answer Book Published
(Posted on August 10, 2015 by )

The 2016 Supplement to the Sixth Edition of the 457 Answer Book was published on August 8, 2014. Carol V. Calhoun is the author of Chapter 1, History of 457 Plans, and Chapter 14, Miscellaneous Issues.

Read more

IRS determination letters after 2016; what are the options?
(Posted on July 28, 2015 by )

As previously discussed, faced with substantial budget cuts, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) has announced that it is eliminating most determination letters (letters concerning the qualified status of retirement plans, which gives rise to numerous tax benefits), effective December 31, 2016. (Announcement 2015-19.) In the past, individually designed retirement plans were able to obtain a determination letter once every five years, during a cycle provided by the IRS. The most likely new regime will involve making determination letters on individually designed plans available only when a plan is first adopted, or when it is terminated. Between those dates, the only way to ensure qualification other than filing a declaratory judgment action with the Tax Court is likely to be to adopt annual updates put out by the IRS that will include model wording for amendments.

For entities that maintain a retirement plan, the new regime may mean that they discover qualification issues only on audit, when it is too late to fix the issue. And the potential penalties on audit (for the employer, the trust under the plan, and the employees) are, as set forth in a prior article, huge. What steps should a plan administrator take to ensure the qualification of a plan after that point? Read more.

Governmental Plan Determination Letters: Last Chance?
(Posted on July 21, 2015 by )

On July 21, 2015, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) issued Announcement 2015-19, in which it announced that it would be making substantial changes to the determination letter program intended to allow retirement plan sponsors to ensure that their plans are qualified (eligible for tax benefits). This announcement will affect all retirement plans intended to be qualified, but will create particular issues for plans maintained by governmental employers (“governmental plans”). Read more.

Wal-Mart sued for retroactive availability of spousal benefits for same-sex spouses
(Posted on July 15, 2015 by )

When the Supreme Court struck down same-sex marriage bans in Obergefell v. Hodges, one of the questions raised was the extent to which couples married before the date of the decision could sue their employers for failing to recognize their marriages for employee benefits purposes. A class action lawsuit filed by the Gay & Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (“GLAD”) and the nonprofit Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs today, Jacqueline Cote, et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., tests that question, arguing that Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“Wal-Mart”) should be liable for failing to recognize an employee’s marriage for periods before the date of the Obergefell decision. Read more.

Page 1 of 812345678