Bloomberg BNA's Pension & Benefits Blog is a special resource offered by Bloomberg BNA to provide commentary and insight on news and trends reported in our publications: Pension & Benefits Daily, Pension & Benefits Reporter, and the Benefits Practice Resource Center. The authors of the blog are members of our Pension & Benefits Publications Advisory Board and members of staff (who contribute summaries of some of their recent stories).
The ideas presented here are those of individuals, and Bloomberg BNA bears no responsibility for the appropriateness or accuracy of the communications between group members. We reserve the right not to post comments that are abusive or otherwise objectionable.
Communications regarding the Pension & Benefits Blog may be directed to Dana Domone via e-mail to ddomone@bna.com.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
by Kristen Ricaurte Knebel
Multiple employer plans, when facing overlapping requirements from the Department of Labor and the Internal Revenue Service, should comply with the more stringent rules, a speaker said during an Oct. 10 webcast sponsored by Bloomberg BNA, titled Multiple Employer Plans—The Evidentiary Law on Open MEPs and Alternatives for the Small to Mid-Sized Employer.
Requirements under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and the tax code are usually coordinated and overlap harmoniously, but in the case of MEPs, it does not work out that way, Erin Turley, a partner at K&L Gates, Dallas, said.
“I think in this particular instance, because of the lack of clarity on DOL's side with respect to what is an MEP, we don't have that same clarity,” she said.
Employers participating in MEPs need to be aware of the different requirements for such plans from the two agencies and be cognizant of where those requirements overlap, Turley said.
They need to comply with the tax code to qualify as a MEP for IRS purposes, and they also need to comply with ERISA reporting and disclosure requirements, she said.
“Where we have an overlap between the two requirements, the [tax] code and ERISA, I think the easiest answer there is: Comply with the more stringent requirements, and you should stay within the zone of reasonableness,” Turley said.
You must Sign In or Register to post a comment.
Fiduciary Rule May Not Appear Until Spring, 408(b)(2) Guide Out Soon, Attorneys Say
ERISA Advisory Council to Recommend Updated Guidance On Finding Lost, Missing Plan Participants
Groups Say Lifetime Income Guidance Should Be Flexible, Provide Protections
Guidance Provides Administrative Relief On Spousal Benefit Issues, Practitioners Say
Should Employers Pay or Play? Podcast by Littler Mendelson Attorneys Steven Friedman and Ilyse Schuman