Advisory Opinions

Whether a welfare benefit plan may provide wellness benefits to current plan participants by using demutualization proceeds attributable to premium payments made by former participants for an insurance contract that gave rise to the plan's receipt of the proceeds.

Whether a prohibited transaction under Code section 4975(c)(1) occurs if an individual causes his IRA to acquire a promissory note from a third-party bank where he and his wife are obligors on the note.

Whether a domestic relations order issued under tribal law by a Family Court of the Navajo Nation would be a "judgment, decree, or order…made pursuant to State domestic relations law," for purposes of the QDRO provisions in ERISA section 206(d)(3).

The SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 (SECURE Act 2.0) amended ERISA to provide that a domestic relations order made pursuant to Tribal domestic relations law is eligible to be considered for qualification under the QDRO provisions in ERISA section 206(d)(3) and Internal Revenue Code section 401(a)(13). The SECURE Act 2.0 amendments apply to domestic relations orders received by plan administrators after December 31, 2022, including any such order which is submitted for reconsideration after such date. Advisory Opinion 2011-03A addressed the relevant statutory provisions before the SECURE Act 2.0 amendments, and accordingly, it is out of date and should not be relied on as stating the Department’s view of the law with respect to domestic relations orders received by plan administrators after December 31, 2022.

Whether the Depawix Health Resources, Inc. employee welfare benefit plan and the Green Cross Managed Health System health benefits program are multiple employer welfare arrangements within the meaning of ERISA section 3(40), and whether ERISA section 514(a) precludes the State of Florida from applying its insurance laws and regulations to those entities and programs, or to any persons who sell or market them in Florida.

Whether the Custom Rail Employer Welfare Trust Fund, which is a "multiple employer welfare arrangement" within the meaning of ERISA section 3(40), is "fully insured" within the meaning of ERISA section 514(b)(6).

Whether the TIAA "Traditional Annuity" is a fully allocated contract for annual reporting purposes within the meaning of 29 C.F.R. § 2520.104-44(b)(2) and the Form 5500 Instructions.

Whether target-date or lifecycle mutual funds constitute "plan assets" of investing employee benefit plans or whether the investment advisers to such mutual funds are fiduciaries to the investing plans under ERISA.

Whether an IRA owner's granting to a broker of a security interest in assets held in his non-IRA accounts to cover potential indebtedness of an IRA established with the broker would result in prohibited transactions under Code section 4975.

Whether an estate plan would give rise to a prohibited transaction under Code section 4975 if it is designed to use permissible minimum distributions from an IRA to fund a Trust, which is not a plan subject to fiduciary obligations under Title I of ERISA or the Code but is a disqualified person with respect to the IRA under Code section 4975, and where the beneficiary of the Trust is the IRA owner's grandson and Trustee of the Trust is the IRA owner's son who is entitled under applicable state law to receive statutory trustee commissions from the Trust.

Whether a trust company's use of deposit accounts of its banking affiliate for investment of cash of certain bank collective investment funds would violate section 406(b)(3) of ERISA.