Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

One good deed may go unpunished: do plan sponsors really increase fiduciary risk by offering third-party investment advice to participants?

Article Abstract:

This article concerns the issue of the liability of employee benefit plan fiduciaries for providing plan beneficiaries with investment advice through third-party investment advisers. Questions may arise regarding the structure of fee arrangements which could violate ERISA prohibited transaction rules. Prudence in selecting and retaining advisers for investment education and no limitation on beneficiaries' access to other advisers are factors making liability unlikely.

Author: Shore, Linda K.
Publisher: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
Publication Name: Tax Management Compensation Planning Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-8607
Year: 1999
Investment advice, Investment Advisory Services, Investment advisers

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


DOL reaffirms warning to employee benefit plan administrators about year 2000 problems and issues fiduciary-related Y2K questions and answers

Article Abstract:

The fiduciary duty of administrators of employee benefit plans to work toward year 2000 computer compliance was reinforced by the US Labor Dept (DOL) in Feb and July 1998 press releases. Questions and answers accompanying the July release provide guidance regarding DOL expectations for prudent procedures which go far beyond reliance upon plan auditors.

Publisher: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
Publication Name: Tax Management Compensation Planning Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-8607
Year: 1998
Planning, Year 2000 transition (Computers)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


District court finds that employer did not breach its fiduciary duties when it failed to exercise contract right to withdraw s. 403(b) plan's assets from insolvent insurer

Article Abstract:

A California U.S. District Court in Crowhurst v. California Institute of Technology determined that an employer's failure to withdraw IRC section 403(b) plan assets from the insolvent insurance carrier of the employer's group annuity plan did not constitute a breach of ERISA fiduciary duties.

Publisher: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
Publication Name: Tax Management Compensation Planning Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-8607
Year: 1999
Qualified benefit plans

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Management, Laws, regulations and rules, Human resource management, Employee benefits, Fiduciary duties
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Mind over market; investors shouldn't let bullish expectations derail long-term investment plans. Knowing when to let go: timing the stock market can make the most of gains, minimize losses
  • Abstracts: Unnamed fiduciary may be liable under ERISA for failure to disclose reasons for discharging investment advisor. part 2
  • Abstracts: Broussard v. Meineke Discount Muffler Shops, Inc.; franchisors as fiduciaries in handling marketing dollars: whose money is it anyway?
  • Abstracts: Econ. profs to battle in Microsoft case; scholars key to debate on meaning of antitrust law. Microsoft's cross challenges U.S. antitrust claim; Sullivan & Cromwell attorney tries to turn government case on its head
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.