This year’s Qualified Plan Fiduciary Summit connected plan sponsors with retirement industry thought leaders, advisors, recordkeepers, ERISA attorneys, money managers, and other service providers. This month’s newsletter article recaps the key themes from the event and items for plan fiduciaries to consider as we navigate a challenging labor market, an active litigation and regulatory environment, and increased employee needs and expectations.
In late March, Congress took its most significant step yet toward the passage of “SECURE Act 2.0”. The House passed the “Securing a Strong Retirement Act of 2022” in a 414-5 vote, which sets up a process through which the Senate will reconcile retirement-related bills currently in committee and negotiate with the House on potential final legislation. This month’s newsletter includes a brief summary of the path forward for SECURE Act 2.0 and identifies the Act’s provisions most likely to have the widest impact.
As we surveyed the fiduciary scene for this month’s newsletter, two topics jumped out at us: market turbulence and next month’s Qualified Plan Fiduciary Summit. We decided to spend some time on both.
In January, the United States Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated ruling in a retirement plan expense lawsuit. The Hughes v. Northwestern University opinion did not necessarily break new ground. However, it may have further stabilized the grounds on which courts across the country will consider motions to dismiss. Plan fiduciaries will be well-served to understand the potential implications.
This morning, the United States Supreme Court issued its widely anticipated ruling in Hughes v. Northwestern University, which involves retirement plan participants’ allegations of needlessly expensive investment options and excessive recordkeeping fees.
The end of the year – or the beginning, for some – is an optimal time for organization-wide or department-specific strategic planning.
When 2021 wraps, plan fiduciaries will encounter an opportune time to closely review their plans’ target date funds (TDFs). The review requires special consideration. TDFs are not oranges to be compared to the apples that make up the plan’s core funds list.
As we enter the home stretch for 2021, plan sponsors are beginning to encounter the typical questions that arise near the end of each calendar year. This month’s newsletter is intended to help you to be prepared for those questions.
As we set out to prepare this month’s newsletter, we first encountered a strange feeling: it seemed that the retirement landscape had entered a momentary standstill.
A qualified plan sponsor’s decision to make the Roth contribution feature available to its employees is no longer an emerging trend. The Roth contribution availability has emerged, solidified its presence, and appears to be here to stay. Many would include it among plan sponsor best practices. Some consider it a competitive arrow within the talent acquisition quiver. Yet, despite its wide acceptance and significant appeal, not all sponsors have embraced Roth contributions.
This paper, written by Matthew Eickman, J.D., AIF®, national retirement practice leader, will review Congress’s steps to permit Roth contributions and explore the various reasons plan sponsors and participants are well-served to take advantage of the Roth opportunity.