our BLOG

Retirement Doctor: Fiduciary and Compliance Mistakes

Jul 24, 2018 2:43:43 PM / by Mike Rogers posted in 401(k) plan, 401(k) plan sponsor, Fees, 401(k), best practices, ERISA, Audit

0 Comments

Fiduciary and Compliance Mistakes in 403(b) Plans

Read More

ERISA Exemption: How the Supreme Court’s Decision Impacts Church Plans

Jun 7, 2017 1:30:50 AM / by Deborah Hyde posted in ERISA exemption, hr compliance, Front Page Post, church plans, Deborah Hyde, ERISA, Supreme Court

0 Comments

ERISA-exemption-churches.jpg

On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court (the Court) issued a unanimous decision in the case of Advocate Health Care Network et al. v. Stapelton et al. that expands the ERISA exemption for church plans to include plans established by church-affiliated organizations. The decision is a departure from prior “plain text” judicial readings of the exemption, but it aligns with the interpretations of other federal agencies.

Read More

The New Fiduciary Rule: What it means for Employer Compliance

Apr 4, 2017 9:18:02 PM / by Deborah Hyde posted in fiduciary, hr compliance, Front Page Post, 401(k), Deborah Hyde, DOL fiduciary rule, ERISA, Financial, industry LEADERSHIP

0 Comments

expanded-fiduciary-standard.jpg

Update: As of April 4, 2017, the Department of Labor finalized a 60-day delay to the effective date of the new fiduciary rule (the Rule). The Rule was originally set to take effect April 10, 2017, but as a result of the delay, will become effective June 9, 2017.  The delay is in response to President Trump's directive that the DOL review and report on how the Rule may negatively impact consumers. 

Read More

MLR Rebates Require Careful Consideration

Oct 9, 2015 8:46:44 AM / by Deborah Hyde posted in ACA, 2015 ACA, MLR, Front Page Post, Affordable Care Act, Deborah Hyde, ERISA, medical loss ratio, MLR Rebates

0 Comments

MLR-rebate.png

Under the Affordable Care Act, insurance carriers are required to spend a minimum percentage of premium dollars on medical care and health care quality improvement. This minimum percentage is referred to as “medical loss ratio” (MLR) and is set at 85% for large group market issuers, 80% for issuers in the small group and individual markets. Any issuer that does not meet the MLR standard for a year must provide a rebate to its policyholders. MLR rebates for 2014 were due to policyholders by September 30, 2015.

Read More

Autism And Employee Benefits: The Self Insured Gap

Aug 25, 2015 9:02:13 PM / by Kelley Jensen posted in ACA, fully insured plan, Kelley Jensen, self-insured plan, ABA, Affordable Care Act, applied behavior analysis, Autism, autism spectrum disorders, benefits CONSULTING, Employee Retirement Income Security Act, ERISA

0 Comments

Fotolia_89267290_Subscription_Monthly_M-1210x423-1024x358.jpg

Employers provide health insurance benefits to their employees and families because they want to be competitive with other employers, retain their workforce; and maybe, as a result of the employer mandate portion of the Affordable Care Act, are required to offer health insurance to avoid penalties.

Read More

Is Your Group Health Plan Due For An ERISA Assessment?

Aug 20, 2015 5:17:49 PM / by Deborah Hyde posted in hr compliance, benefits CONSULTING, Deborah Hyde, Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, ERISA

0 Comments

ERISA-gap-assessment.png

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) is federal law that regulates employer-sponsored health and welfare plans of all sizes – both fully-insured and self-funded. To ensure group health plan compliance, federal agencies such as the Department of Labor and the IRS are tasked with enforcing ERISA and its related laws, including HIPAA, COBRA, and now the ACA. Despite the complexity of these laws, employers can take steps to prevent the costly consequences of noncompliance. An ERISA gap assessment can serve as the first line of defense by identifying areas of weakness and addressing vulnerabilities.

Read More

Class Action Suit Calls into Question a Common ACA Strategy

Jul 1, 2015 3:13:45 PM / by Deborah Hyde posted in ACA, ACA Strategy, interference with benefits, lawsuit, Affordable Care Act, class action law suit, Deborah Hyde, employer shared responsibility, ERISA, Marin v. Dave & Buster’s Inc

0 Comments

class-action-suit.jpg

Under the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) employer shared responsibility rules, large employers are required to offer medical coverage to substantially all full-time employees – those who work an average of 30 or more hours per week. This expansion of the class of full-time eligible employees undoubtedly poses a challenge to many employers who must balance the need to comply with ACA rules with budgetary constraints.

Read More

Is it Time to Review your Company-Sponsored Retirement Plan?

Jun 24, 2015 3:25:29 PM / by Kelley Jensen posted in 401(k) plan, 401(k) plan sponsor, advisor, Kelley Jensen, Tibble v. Edison International, Affordable Care Act, benefits CONSULTING, broker, Company-Sponsored Retirement Plan, company-sponsored retirement plans, ERISA, ERISA plan decision, plan investments

0 Comments

time-to-review-company-retirement-plan.jpg

Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in the case of Tibble v. Edison International, a lawsuit that centered on an alleged breach of fiduciary duty by a 401(k) plan sponsor. On May 18th, the Supreme Court issued its unanimous opinion on Tibble.

Read More

401(k) Sponsors: Scrutiny Intensifies with Impending Decision from the Supreme Court

May 17, 2015 12:27:52 PM / by Deborah Hyde posted in 401(k) plan, 401(k) plan sponsor, Tibble v. Edison International, 401(k), Affordable Care Act, benefits CONSULTING, Deborah Hyde, ERISA

0 Comments

401k-scrutiny.jpg

UPDATE: The Supreme Court issued its unanimous opinion in Tibble on Monday, May 18.  The Court ruled in favor of the 401(k) participants and held that ERISA’s fiduciary duty requires a continuing duty, “separate and apart from the duty to exercise prudence in selecting investments at the outset,” to monitor plan investments.  Significantly, participants will be able to bring a claim of breach of the continuing duty of prudence so long as the alleged breach occurred within six years of the suit.  Employers, therefore, must undertake consistent quarterly or annual reviews of investments, and must systematically consider the prudence of each investment at that time.  Read the Court’s opinion here.

Read More

Subscribe to Email Updates

Lists by Topic

see all

Posts by Topic

see all

Recent Posts