Advisory Opinions

Whether, upon formation of a partnership that intends to comply with the venture capital operating company exception contained in section 29 CFR 2510.3-101, the funds received as initial capital contributions from employee benefit plans will constitute plan assets prior to the partnership's first "venture capital investment".

Whether the investment in publicly offered limited partnerships; would satisfy the "freely transferable" requirement of the "publicly-offered" exception contained in the plan asset regulation section 29 CFR 2510.3-101(b)(2).

Whether either the Better Business Bureau Insurance Trust or the utilization of the Trust (the Trust) to provide health care and other benefits to the employees of Griffith's Five Day Tire Store constitutes a MEWA within the meaning of 3(40) and an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of Title I of ERISA. Whether section 514(a) of title I of ERISA would preempt any state law from regulating the Trust.

Whether the receipt of "free checking" account services by a customer who directs his IRA to invest $2000 in a Bank financial products would be a prohibited transaction within the meaning of section 4975(c)(1) of the Code.

Whether (1) the amendment and merger of the six Defined Benefit (DB) plans into one DB plan, and (2) the amendment of the stock bonus plan, under the circumstances described therein, would not render the grandfather provision of section 9345(a)(3) of OBRA 87, inapplicable to the Arrangement.

Whether the Professional Medical Products, Inc., (PMP) Educational Assistance Program is an unfunded scholarship program within the meaning of 29 C.F.R. §2510.3-1(k) and, therefore, not an "employee welfare benefit plan" subject to reporting and disclosure or other requirements applicable to employee benefit plans covered by title I of ERISA.

Whether the reimbursement of the Manville Corporation by the Manville-sponsored employee benefit plans for the direct expenses incurred by Manville, the plan sponsor, in providing administrative and asset management services to such plans would not constitute a prohibited transaction under section 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

Whether the South Florida Carpenters' Joint Apprenticeship and Training Trust Fund, established by the South Florida Carpenters' District Council, AFL-CIO, and various employers of carpenters and associations of employers of carpenters for the purpose of training and educating apprentice and journeyman carpenters, is subject to sections 408(b)(2) and 408(c)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA).

Whether the payment of $127,597 to purchase a retirement pension for Mr. Bray, the sole full-time employee of the South Florida Carpenters' Joint Apprenticeship and Training Trust Fund, established by the South Florida Carpenters' District Council, AFL-CIO, and various employers of carpenters and associations of employers of carpenters for the purpose of training and educating apprentice and journeyman carpenters, constitutes "compensation" and "compensation for services rendered" for purposes of sections 408(b)(2) and 408(c)(2) of ERISA, respectively.

Whether the Union National Bank Incentive Bonus Plan which provides bonuses to employees for work performance is an employee pension benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(2) of title I of ERISA.

Whether the proposed Stouffer Hotel Management Corporation Vacation Pay Plan for certain Hourly Employees is an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of title I of ERISA.