Advisory Opinions

Whether employers adopting SEP arrangements with Foothill Thrift, an industrial loan company, would not be precluded from using the alternative method of compliance prescribed in 29 CFR §2520.104-49 by reason of certain limitations on the withdrawal of funds by participants exercisable by Foothill Thrift. Whether the limitations on withdrawal provisions of Foothill Thrift's IRA investment certificates, which could possibly affect withdrawals of contributions under a SEP arrangement, are deemed to be "provisions that prohibit the withdrawal of funds by participants" within the meaning of such phrase as it is used in §2520.104-49.

Whether the Ford Motor Company’s Salaried Income Security Plan is an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of ERISA and not an employee pension benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(2) of ERISA.

Whether the Chiropractic Health Plan Trust is an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of ERISA. Whether the state chiropractic associations would be "employers" within the meaning of section 3(5) of ERISA in relation to a program of benefits which are among those identified in section 3(1) of ERISA and which is offered to the members of these chiropractic associations?

Whether a pension plan established and maintained by Blind Industries and Services of Maryland (BISM) only for its employees and a plan maintained both by BISM for its employees and by the Maryland Vending Facilities Program, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR), a division of the Maryland Department of Education, for former BISM employees now employed by DVR are governmental plans excluded from coverage by title I of ERISA.

Whether the Eastern Small Business Federation Group Trust is an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of ERISA and is covered by title I of ERISA. Whether section 514 of ERISA preempts the provisions of Chapter 676 of the Connecticut General Laws (Conn. Chap. 676) from applying to the Trust.

Whether the proposed wage continuation plans of International Metals & Machines, Inc. and certain of its affiliates constitute a payroll practice within the meaning of 29 C.F.R. §2510.3-1(b)(2) rather than an employee welfare benefit plan described in ERISA section 3(1) and, thus, excluded from ERISA title I coverage.

Whether the retention by the Vanguard Fiduciary Trust Company of the Vanguard Group to provide certain services to the Trust Company in the Trust Company's capacity as a fiduciary to employee benefits plans is exempt from the prohibitions of section 406 of ERISA and section 4975(c) of the Code by reason of section 408(b)(2) of ERISA and section 4975(d)(2) of the Code. Whether the retention of Vanguard Group by the Trust Company does not constitute an act of self-dealing in violation of section 406(b)(1) of ERISA.

Whether the Sisters of Mercy Short Term Disability Plan, the Sisters of Mercy Dental Plan, and the Sisters of Mercy Health Care Plan qualify for the limited exemption from certain annual reporting requirements of ERISA provided by 29 CFR §2520.104-44.

Whether an employer would not be considered to establish or maintain an "employee pension benefit plan" within the meaning of section 3(2) of title I of ERISA by virtue of having taken certain actions related to Equitable's Group IRA solely to facilitate their employees’ participation in Equitable's Group IRA and all the criteria contained in regulation 29 C.F.R. §2510.3-2(d) and Opinion 81-80A are met.

Whether the provision of investment management services by Krehbiel & Hubbard, Inc., the provision of trustee services by Krehbiel and Hubbard and the provision of custodial and temporary investment services by the Custodian would be exempt from the prohibitions of section 406(a) of ERISA under section 408(b)(2). Whether the initial appointment of Krehbiel & Hubbard, Inc. as investment manager of the Master Trust and Hubbard and Krehbiel as trustees of the Master Trust by independent plan fiduciaries pursuant to the Joinder Agreement and the adoption of the Master Trust would not cause Hubbard, Krehbiel, and Krehbiel & Hubbard, Inc. to violate sections 406(b)(l) or 406(b)(2). Whether the provision of services in itself by Krehbiel & Hubbard, Inc. and Krehbiel and Hubbard under the collective investment program will result in acts described in section 406(b)(1) of ERISA. Whether the temporary investment of Master Trust assets in the Custodian's Collective Investment Plan for Daily Interest at the direction of Krehbiel & Hubbard, Inc. is exempted under section 408(b)(8). Whether the temporary investment of Master Trust assets in deposits of the Custodian at the direction of Krehbiel & Hubbard, Inc. is exempted under section 408(b)(4).