Advisory Opinions

Requests for interpretations and other rulings under Title 1 of ERISA are handled by the Office of Regulations and Interpretations under the provisions established by ERISA Procedure 76-1. The office answers inquiries from individuals and organizations in the form of advisory opinions, which apply the law to a specific set of facts, or information letters, which merely call attention to well established principles or interpretations.

Data Dictionary

Start Date

Select Reference

**1981**
AO/ Date/ Reference	Recipient	Description of Request
1981-06A 01/05/1981 3(1) 3(4) 3(5) 412	Mr. Thomas W. Stram Kerr, Russell and Weber 2100 Detroit Bank & Trust Building Detroit, Michigan 48226	Whether group insurance plans offered by the Michigan Dental Association (MDA) constitute employee welfare benefit plans within the meaning of ERISA section 3(1) and, if covered, the extent to which ERISA requirements concerning bonding and reporting are applicable to MDA or its Board of Trustees.
1981-05A 01/02/1981 407(d)(5)	David E. Gordon, Esquire O’Melveny & Myers 611 West Sixth Street Los Angeles, California 90013	Whether the shares of common stock of Santa Anita Realty Enterprises, Inc. (Realty) and Santa Anita Operating Company, Inc. (OC), as evidenced by “back-to-back” stock certificates (the Paired Shares), constitute “qualifying employer securities” within the meaning of ERISA section 407(d)(5) with respect to the Plan. And further, whether the Plan's holdings of the common stock of Realty and OC violate ERISA section 404(a)(2) or 407.

**1980**
AO/ Date/ Reference	Recipient	Description of Request
1981-04A 12/22/1980 408(b)(5)	John W. Rossitter, Esq. Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company 140 Garden Street Hartford, Connecticut 06115	Your submission concerns the prohibited transaction rules provided under sections 406 and 408 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (the Act), and section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (the Code).
1981-03A 12/22/1980 103	Mr. Homer L. Elliott Drinker Biddle & Reath 1100 Philadelphia National Bank Building Broad and Chestnut Streets Philadelphia, PA 19107	Advisory opinion regarding (1) the requirement contained in section 103(a)(3)(A) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) that a plan engage an independent qualified public accountant, and (2) the requirement of section 103(b) of ERISA that a plan include in its annual report a report from such qualified public accountant regarding the financial status of the plan.
1981-02A 12/22/1980 514(a)	Mr. Michael C. Greenfield Asher, Goodstein, Pavalon, Gittler, Greenfield and Segall, Ltd. 228 North LaSalle Street Chicago, Illinois 60601	Whether the participant whose benefits are garnished must be in pay status when the court decree is entered or when the decree is enforced.
1981-01A 12/17/1980 3(2)	Mr. Stuart J. Offer Morrison & Foerster One Market Plaza Spear Street Tower San Francisco, California 94105	Whether a revised program of supplemental benefit payments (the Revised Program) to be made to former employees by the Crocker National Bank (the Bank) constitutes an employee pension benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(2) of ERISA.
1980-74A 10/08/1980 3(1)	Wesley J. Kinder Insurance Commissioner State of California 100 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 Attention: Raul V. Aguilar Senior Counsel	Whether the program of benefits offered by the Common Market Employee Benefit Association ("CMEBA"), during the time this entity was in operation, constituted an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of ERISA §3(1), 29 U.S.C. §1002(1).
1980-73A 10/21/1980 404(b)	Karl A. Schmidt, Esq. Lillick McHose & Charles 707 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90017	Whether the Mitsubishi Bank of California (MBC) exercises management and control of plan assets as defined in Department of Labor Regulation 29 CFR §2550.404b-1(c).
1980-72A 12/08/1980 3(1) 3(2)	Mr. Mario S. Belaval Vice-President Bacardi Corporation G.P.O. Box 3549 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00936	Whether a severance program (the Program) of Bacardi Corporation (the Employer) located in Catano, Puerto Rico, constitutes an "employee benefit plan" under section 3(3) of ERISA. Further, you ask if the Program is an "employee benefit plan" would it be an "employee welfare benefit plan" under section 3(1) of ERISA or an "employee pension benefit plan" under section 3(2) of ERISA.
1980-71A 12/01/1980 3(1) 3(2)	Mr. Kenneth L. Maher Williams & Brooke, P.C. One Financial Plaza Hartford, Connecticut	Whether certain insurance and annuity contracts issued by the Covenant Life Insurance Company held by certain employee benefit plans are considered plan assets.