On May 21, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (the “DOL”) finalized its proposed regulation expanding electronic delivery for retirement plan disclosures.  On balance, the final regulation is generally consistent with the proposed regulation, although there are a number of key differences, including the addition of a new “direct email” delivery option not included

As previewed in our prior blog post, the recently enacted SECURE Act includes many changes that affect employer-sponsored benefit plans and require the attention of plan administrators.  Among these changes, effective for distributions made after December 31, 2019 (for individuals who reach age 70½ after that date), is the delay of the “required beginning

On October 23, 2019, the Department of Labor published a new proposed regulation that paves the way for “notice and access” electronic delivery of certain disclosures for retirement plans.  The proposal is welcome news for plan sponsors and administrators who have been frustrated by the existing “opt-in” regime for electronic disclosure.  But the proposal is

The IRS recently released final regulations making a number of changes to the rules applicable to hardship distributions from 401(k) and 403(b) plans.  Concluding our three-part series on the final regulations, this blog entry will focus on the following changes to the hardship distribution rules: (1) modifications to the list of safe harbor expenses that

As discussed in our prior blog entry, the IRS recently released final regulations making a number of significant changes to the rules applicable to hardship distributions from 401(k) and 403(b) plans.  As part of our continuing series on these final regulations, this blog entry will focus on two specific issues: (1) the elimination of

Last week, the Department of Treasury and the IRS issued final regulations regarding hardship distributions from 401(k) and 403(b) plans.  The final regulations respond to comments based on earlier proposed regulations and make a number of significant changes to the existing IRS rules that apply to hardship distributions.

Given the detailed material in the regulatory

Plan administrators charged with administering Employee Retirement Income Security Act-governed severance plans are often confronted with the question of whether they should conduct an independent investigation into the reasons the employer-plan sponsor terminated an individual’s employment before deciding whether to grant or deny the individual’s claim for severance benefits. The decision to conduct such an investigation, and, the breadth of such an investigation, may have consequences in the event of litigation.

This article provides some guidance to plan fiduciaries in evaluating claims for severance benefits.

Many severance plans provide that an employee is ineligible for benefits if terminated “for cause” and define cause as, among other things: neglect in performing one’s duties, misconduct, or unsatisfactory performance. A threshold question for those charged with the responsibility for deciding severance benefit claims and appeals is thus whether the employee was in fact terminated “for cause.” Whether and, if so, how “for cause” is defined is controlled by the terms of the plan.[1] What is required of plan fiduciaries under these circumstances? May they accept the employer’s stated reason for the employee’s discharge? Must they conduct an independent investigation into the reasons for the employee’s discharge? Somewhat surprisingly, there are relatively few reported decisions addressing whether a plan fiduciary has an obligation to conduct an independent investigation into an employer’s reasons for discharging an employee.

The issue of who may be a proper defendant in an ERISA claim for benefits has not received consistent treatment in the courts. On the one hand, a federal district court in Minnesota recently concluded that a third party administrator was a proper defendant in a lawsuit seeking benefits on the grounds that Section 502(a)(1)(B),