Follow Us
© 2026 Arizent. All rights reserved.
With the Supreme Court's ruling on health care reform pending, the fate of the Affordable Care Act remains largely uncertain. In the meantime, however, the law is still in force. The Department of Labor has begun requesting, through recent audit requests on health and welfare plans, that employers prove their plans currently comply with the Act. Is your plan ready?
JPMorgan Chase & Co has been hit with a lawsuit brought on behalf of employees whose retirement holdings fell in value after the largest U.S. bank revealed a surprise $2 billion trading loss earlier this month. The defendants are accused of violating fiduciary duties to 401(k) and other retirement plan participants by including company stock as an investment option, hiding the stock's risk, and failing to move participants to safer choices.
At what point does clicking "Like" on a Facebook page result in a pair of federal complaints pitting employers against employees and raising fresh questions about the role of online speech? In recent weeks, two cases have come to light, each featuring employees clicking "Like" on Facebook and being fired for having done so.
Today, more and more participants are requesting hardship distributions from their 401(k) plans in an effort to make ends meet. While you no doubt want to comply with their requests, you don't want to do so to the detriment of your plan. It's critical to understand what the law allows and to review your plan's hardship distribution procedures in order to avoid the headaches that will result from impermissible hardship distributions.
In a series of three notices, the IRS has signaled the approach that it may take on certain key issues arising under the employer shared responsibility, or "pay or play,” provisions of the Affordable Care Act and is seeking comment on these and other questions. All of the matters discussed in the notices will ultimately be addressed in regulations. …
Have a problem with federal employee benefit regulations? Write to the agencies that issue them. That was the message from the Department of Labor, Internal Revenue Service and Employee Benefits Security Administration at an International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans conference on Wednesday in Washington, D.C.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has issued its long-anticipated Enforcement Guidance on employer use of arrest and conviction records in making employment decisions. The guidance, released on April 25, 2012, is grounded on the premise that any employment practice that has a disparate impact upon a Title VII protected group is unlawful unless the practice is job related and consistent with business necessity.
The retirement planning industry is asking once again for leniency from federal fee disclosure regulations that take effect July 1.
As a result of foreign ownership, it's common for U.S. employees to receive stock options from foreign parents that are subject to taxation in the United States.
Regulators are more closely examining companies that serve employers' retirement plans, a sign that there may be harsher enforcement when new fee disclosure rules take effect this summer.
The approximately 65 million job seekers in the United States who have criminal records would get more thorough consideration by potential employers under new guidelines embraced by the federal government last week.
The Internal Revenue Service has issued a proposed rule addressing the fees imposed by the Affordable Care Act on issuers of certain health insurance policies and plan sponsors of certain self-insured health plans to fund comparative effectiveness research. These fees are designed to support the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund. The Affordable Care Act includes provisions establishing the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, a private, nonprofit corporation whose purpose is to “assist, through research, patients, clinicians,
Despite recent tax reform proposals, experts testified at a House committee hearing Tuesday that cutting the incentives for retirement plans would be detrimental to savings in this country.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 prohibits discrimination on the basis of age and covers employees who are 40 years of age and older, which provides a statutory exception for "reasonable factors other than age." Since the Supreme Court held in Smith v. City of Jackson that employees could bring a disparate impact case under the ADEA, employers have sought guidance from the EEOC on how it would interpret the cryptic phrase "reasonable
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.
On Monday, the Supreme Court began hearing oral arguments addressing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Day one of the oral arguments focused on the application of the “Anti-Injunction Act,” which could prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on the constitutionality of PPACA (if it is considered a tax law) because the penalties would not become applicable until 2015. Although both parties agree that the Supreme Court’s review should not be barred by the
Companies that serve 401(k) plans are asking the Labor Department to reconsider its stance on mailed notification, so that they can save costs by using email instead of regular mail to send information to plan participants. However, the industry also is trying to balance that need with the needs of older workers, who tend to not be as computer-savvy.
Facebook and lawmakers have warned employers against requesting Facebook passwords while screening job applicants, a controversial practice that underscores the blurring distinction between personal and professional lives in the era of social media.
Skinner is a welcome decision for plan fiduciaries. It is, however, only the first appellate opinion on the subject post-Amara. Additionally, the facts of the case were not particularly compelling for the plaintiffs, since they received accurate information before making their retirement decisions and thus never relied on the faulty SPD. Undoubtedly other courts will tackle the issue of ERISA remedies in the coming months. In the meantime, however, employer/plan administrators should continue to subject their plan documents and benefits communications to a careful review to ensure their accuracy and clarity. Skinner teaches that, in the context of benefit communications, an ounce of prevention is truly worth a pound of cure.
The Department of Labor is not going to let push-back from the financial services industry delay its fiduciary rule for advisers who handle retirement plans but that does not mean the regulation will be out anytime soon.