Frank Palmieri

Frank Palmieri

Partner

Frank Palmieri is an attorney who limits his practice to tax and ERISA employee benefit and employment related matters. Prior to founding Palmieri & Eisenberg, Mr. Palmieri headed the employee benefits practice for a major accounting firm in the Philadelphia Region, was a partner in a New Jersey law firm which specialized in employee benefit and labor matters, worked for a major Philadelphia law firm, and began his employee benefits career working in New York City. nnMr. Palmieri has extensive experience in both tax and ERISA employee benefit matters, including the establishment, operation and termination of qualified retirement plans for public and privately held companies; implementation and review of executive compensation and equity compensation programs; nonqualified deferred compensation plans for taxable and tax-exempt organizations; healthcare cost containment and design of Section 125 cafeteria plans; HIPAA compliance; U.S. and foreign compensation programs; mergers and acquisitions; retiree medical and COBRA issues; and employee benefits litigation. As a partner in a law firm specializing in employee benefit and labor matters he was responsible for benefit issues relating to corporate downsizings, union negotiations, preparation of employee handbooks, and a broad range of tax and human resource matters. Mr. Palmieri has over 27 years of experience in applying tax, ERISA, labor, employment and insurance laws to complex transactions, and helping employers understand the ramifications of their decisions. nnMr. Palmieri is a Lecturer at the Rutgers Center for Management Development, and is a frequent national lecturer for employer and professional organizations. He writes a monthly “Benefits Law” column in Employee Benefit News and previously authorized a similar column from 1994 through 1998. He is also Editorial Advisor for a weekly Legal Alert for Employee Benefit News. Mr. Palmieri’s other accomplishments include writing a Chapter on “Qualified Retirement Plans” for the Corporate Controller’s Manual; co-authoring a book entitled “Complying with the Family & Medical Leave Act: A Detailed Guide”; authoring Chapters for the Employment Law Handbook and publishing numerous articles in various publications. Mr. Palmieri is Vice Chair of the Qualified Retirement Plan Committee of the American Bar Association Real Property Probate and Trust Law Section (2008 to present). Mr. Palmieri previously chaired the American Bar Association, Tax Section, Subcommittees on Section 125 Plans, State Regulations of Welfare Benefits, Welfare Plan Design Issues and COBRA (1993 to 2007). Mr. Palmieri served on both the Board of Directors and the Personnel Committee of the Family and Children’s Services of Central New Jersey, Inc., a not-for-profit entity. Mr. Palmieri has been selected as one of the “Best Employee Benefits” attorneys in the States of New Jersey and New York every year since 1995, has been recognized by his peers as a “Super Lawyer” in the field of employee benefits law, and has been named one of the “Best Employee Benefits Lawyers” in America since 1995. Mr. Palmieri is also a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel.n nMr. Palmieri is a graduate of St. John’s University School of Law and has an advanced law degree in taxation (LL.M.) from New York University School of Law. He is also a graduate of St. John’s University College of Business Administration and is a Certified Public Accountant. Mr. Palmieri is licensed to practice law in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and the District of Columbia. n

Watch plans for undue influence

It's important to maintain strong relationships with employee benefit advisers who provide professional services at reasonable fees. However, employers must periodically question why they maintain certain relationships, particularly if fees appear to be higher than usual and/or service has declined. Sometimes a relationship is maintained with a vendor due to a long-term friendship. Other times it's maintained due to the influence of a parent corporation or for other business reasons. In all circumstances, employers should periodically evaluate vendors, fees and services, and ensure that no undue influences exist. For this reason, many employers should consider establishing a formal ERISA fiduciary gift policy.

MEWAs under scrutiny

ERISA defines a multiple employer welfare arrangement as an employee welfare plan or any other arrangement which is established or maintained for the purpose of providing welfare benefits to the employees of two or more "unrelated" entities. Thus, if a welfare plan is maintained by an employer for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits to that employer's employees, former employees (e.g., retirees) or beneficiaries (e.g., spouses, former spouses, dependents) of such employees, the plan will be considered a "single employer" plan and not a MEWA.

Maintaining status takes planning

Prior to 2006, employers were required to submit determination letter requests to the IRS during certain periods. These periods – during which plans were required to be amended for various tax acts, such as the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 – are referred to as the remedial amendment periods. In Revenue Procedure 2005-66, as modified by Revenue Procedure 2007-44, the IRS created a staggered determination letter program. This process was established to spread the IRS' work over a period of years, thus freeing up resources to perform retirement plan audits. The periods to submit qualified retirement plans for determination letters are based upon a plan sponsor's employer identification number.

When is ERISA preemption permitted? Beneficiary designation forms can cause headaches for benefits administrators

Benefit administrators, 401(k) vendors, recordkeepers and benefits professionals regularly recommend that participants in qualified retirement plans periodically review and update their beneficiary designation forms. Qualified retirement plans provide that if a married participant dies without a beneficiary designated, the death benefit will be paid to the participant's spouse, unless the spouse consents in writing to appointing an alternate payee. For a single participant, benefits are paid to their estate if no beneficiary is designated. What could be simpler that merely indicating to whom or to what entity a participant wishes their assets to be transferred in the event of death? Unfortunately, numerous issues arise in connection with the simple task of designating a beneficiary.

Nothing is simple

What could be simpler than merely indicating to whom or to what entity a participant wishes their assets to be transferred in the event of death? Unfortunately, numerous issues arise in connection with the simple task of designating a beneficiary.

Sign Up Form

Login Modal Form