As DC plans rise in importance, so does the due diligence paid to them

It was reported in yesterday’s WSJ that International Paper has settled a law suit with 10 current and former employees related to their 401(k) plan.  (The article follows my brief note)  We believe that the DOL and other regulatory agencies are preparing for greater scrutiny of defined contribution plans (401(k), 403(b) and 457 plans) as a result.  It has been reported that the DOL has increased their field forces to perform DC plan audits.  With all of the reporting changes that have been put in place in the last several years, plan sponsors need to pay greater attention to what is expected of them in administering their defined contribution plans.  DC audits can be onerous and we suspect that many plans would have negative findings taht may result in fines to the organization.  In addition, the regulatory agencies are reviewing plans of all sizes.  Are you ready?  Call us, if you feel that you might need some assistance minimizing the risk against a potentially poor outcome in a field exam / audit.  At KCS, we can perform a fiduciary review to make sure that your plan is in compliance with current regulations.  Call us.

Here’s the WSJ article:

International Paper Co. IP -1.66% and 10 current and former employees agreed to a $30 million settlement in a suit over the company’s 401(k) plans.

The company agreed to distribute the money among some 70,000 individual workers’ and former participants’ accounts as well as put the plan’s administration out for bid.

 

Workers in a variety of industries have filed claims against more than two dozen workplace retirement-savings plans in recent years over allegedly high fees and unsuitable investments. The cases are starting to work their way through the courts, with workers scoring legal victories and forcing changes in the way some plans operate.

 

The International Paper pact is believed to be the second-highest payment in disputes over retirement-plan fees.

The International Paper settlement is believed by retirement-plan litigators to be the second-highest payment to date in disputes over retirement-plan fees.

 

“I think this one of the most impactful things to happen in the 401(k) industry in decades,” said Marcia Wagner, a Boston lawyer who specializes in employee-retirement-plan law and represents plan sponsors and administrators.

 

In the International Paper case, workers alleged in a claim filed in 2006 in U.S. District Court in East St. Louis, Ill., that the company’s 401(k) plans for hourly and salaried employees violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, or Erisa, the federal law that covers a wide range of workplace retirement plans.

 

The claim alleged that International Paper maintained its own publicly traded stock as an investment option, paid “excessive” fees for record keeping and investment management, and “fraudulently” reported performance histories for the plans’ funds. The plaintiffs also claimed that the company improperly delayed making contributions to the plans and retained interest earned on those contributions for corporate accounts, according to the settlement.

International Paper, which was the plans’ sponsor, denied all the claims. It said the fees paid to the plan’s service providers, including J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., are “prudent and reasonable,” and that its 401(k) plans have offered “a broad portfolio of prudent investment options,” according to the settlement.

“The case in question was filed seven years ago and we are pleased to be able to put this behind us,” an International Paper spokesman said in a statement. “Today’s settlement agreement is not an admission of liability on behalf of the company.”

 

A J.P. Morgan spokesman declined to comment.

 

“It seemed as if the fees were very, very hidden and hard to figure out,” said Paul Glenney, a 61-year-old factory manager in Mattoon, Ill., who left International Paper about 10 years ago but kept his 401(k) account. With the settlement, “I’ve been able to not just help my own retirement but other people’s.”

 

Nearly 73 million U.S. workers and retirees had 401(k) accounts as of Dec. 31, 2011, according to the latest data available from the nonprofit Employee Benefit Research Institute. Defined-contribution plans, including 401(k)s, held $5.3 trillion as of June 30, according to the Investment Company Institute, a trade group.

 

[image]

Following several claims, the U.S. Labor Department issued a rule last year requiring 401(k) administrators to better spell out fees being charged to plan sponsors and participants.

 

The largest amount negotiated to date in a 401(k) fee case is believed to be the $35 million preliminary settlement reached in July by Cigna Corp. CI -0.41% workers. Their claim alleged that the company’s 401(k) plan breached the Erisa law by selecting itself as plan administrator and by offering “imprudent funds” as investment options. Cigna has denied the allegations and declined further comment.

Workers in the International Paper and Cigna cases were represented by Jerome Schlichter, a St. Louis lawyer who has filed 14 claims over 401(k) fees or self-dealing in the past seven years.

 

“More and more people are aware of the fact that fees have not been a priority with a lot of companies with 401(k) plans,” Mr. Schlichter said. “We’re seeing more recognition of the fact that this duty of an employer when they offer a 401(k) plan is very real, and there’s a high level of obligation to the employees. And courts are recognizing this more and more as well.”

 

In September, workers who sued Boeing Co. BA -2.21% over 401(k) fees were granted class-action status in U.S. District Court in East St. Louis. A Boeing spokesman declined to comment. And in August, workers at Lockheed Martin Corp. LMT -1.80% who alleged in a federal lawsuit that their plan’s stable-value fund was improperly invested in money-market funds won a reversal of a denial of class-action certification from the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.

“Lockheed Martin continues to evaluate its options,” a company spokeswoman said in a statement. “We remain committed to defending against this lawsuit at all stages of the litigation.”

KCS Fireside Chat – 403 (b) Plans: Oldies but Goodies!

KCSThis month’s Fireside Chat was crafted by our partner, Dave Murray, the former plan sponsor for Conrail’s DB and DC plans.  Dave has become a real expert in all things DC.  Dave’s focus this month is on the 403(B) space, and specifically those plan’s dealing with non-profits.  Many of our colleagues, friends and associates volunteer at non-profits, with many holding board or finance positions.  With this great responsibility comes the need to stay on top of legislative changes.  We hope that you find this piece educational.

Washington’s Folly

I have to be careful!  I find myself shaking my head so frequently at what is transpiring in Washington DC, that I might suffer permanent nerve damage.  It is scary how uninformed our politicians are regarding economics, and specifically the role of federal deficits in generating economic activity.

There are four primary sources of profits at the macro level of the US economy including, consumption (consumer spending), corporate investment (plant, equipment and inventory), net exports (exports minus imports) and net government spending (deficit spending minus tax receipts).  Since the great recession, it has really only been the federal spending that has kept corporate profits at all-time highs (averaging > 10% of GDP).  The consumer and corporations have kept spending and investment below normal historical levels, and our net exports are nearly -$500 billion. If it weren’t for the fact that the US fiscal deficit was as great as it has been, the economic recovery would have been far more muted, especially in 2010 and 2011.

Remember, the Federal deficit = private savings! Cut back too much on the federal deficit spending without a commensurate pick up in investment and consumption, and we could teeter on the brink of another recession.  With employment remaining weak, we need corporations to pick up the slack.  We may also benefit by becoming a bigger energy exporter, reducing the negative consequence of being a net importer nation, but that might take years.  Until then, we need Washington to stop focusing on the debt ceiling and expend their energy on creating an economic environment that creates jobs and stimulates demand for goods and services.

Youth unemployment’s second derivative effect

Much has been written about the growing unemployment crisis for those under 30 in the US, with <50% of that cohort working a full-time job, but there is a secondary effect that hasn’t gotten much notice.  With the demise of defined benefit plans as the primary source of retirement income, defined contribution plans are rapidly becoming the only retirement game in town.  However, for DC plans to be effective, employees need to fund as much as they can, as early as they can, in order to build a nest egg that will accumulate the necessary assets for a 20-25 year retirement.  With the younger workers not entering the workforce until they are in their late 20s, they are missing out on several years of contributions and compounding.  Unfortunately, managing a DC plan has proven difficult enough for most of us.  We certainly don’t need further impediments exacerbating an already tough situation.

Ryan ALM: Solutions for Detroit and Public Pensions

statepensions

The Long, Sorry Tale of Pension Promises, WSJ

Underfunded and underperforming pensions are damaging our huge population of baby boomers that are entering retirement. The bad news? It’s only the beginning.

The temptation for governments to negotiate unrealistic benefits was even greater than in the private sphere. Elected officials knew that, by the time benefits came due, they would be out of office. Union officials knew it, too. Once benefits were agreed to, cities and states chose to skimp on funding. Politically, it was always preferable to build the extra school or staff the additional fire station than to squirrel away more pension money.”

“This is a pity because, when properly run, pensions remain the best form of retirement plan. They do away with many of the risks born by individuals alone, such as outliving one’s savings or retiring at the wrong time. And most people don’t have the expertise to manage portfolios.”

Our own Ronald Ryan from Ryan ALM Inc. has provided solutions to our nations’ pension problems in his paper: Solutions for Detroit and Public Pensions