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.
AO/ Date/ Reference | Recipient | Description of Request |
---|---|---|
10/09/1998
3(1) 3(40) |
Barbara G. Sweet, National Director |
Request a reconsideration of Opinion 97-14A, which concluded that the health care program offered by the Federation of American Consumers and Travelers to its members is a multiple employer welfare arrangement within the meaning of ERISA section 3(40)(A) and, therefore, to the extent provided in ERISA section 514(b)(6)(A), is subject to applicable state insurance law. |
09/24/1998
PTE 92-06 |
Robin M. Schachter, Esq. |
Whether PTE 92-6 covers: (1) a plan sale to multiple relatives of the insured who are the sole beneficiaries under the contract; (2) a plan sale of a life insurance contract covering the life of a participant and his or her spouse; and (3) the sale by a plan of a partial interest in a life insurance contract where, following such sale, both the interest retained by the plan and the interest sold will qualify as a life insurance contracts under applicable state law. |
07/30/1998
PTE 77-3 |
Mr. Donald J. Myers |
Whether PTE 77-3 provides relief for the investment by a bank’s in-house plan in a mutual fund advised by the bank through an in-kind exchange of assets for mutual fund shares, if the exemption’s conditions are satisfied. |
06/19/1998
3(33) |
Ms. Sandi J. Porter |
Whether certain employee benefit plans maintained by Foulkeways at Gwynedd, a non-profit, continuing care retirement community, are “church plans” within the meaning of ERISA section 3(33). |
05/28/1998
404(c ) |
William M. Tartikoff |
Whether a plan fiduciary's selection of a "socially-responsible fund" as a plan investment or a designated investment alternative for a section 404(c) plan would violate the general fiduciary duties and responsibilities of ERISA sections 403(c) and 404(a)(1). |
03/06/1998
IRC 408(A) |
Kristine J. Coffey, Chair |
Whether a Roth IRA as defined in Internal Revenue Code section 408A will be considered an IRA for purposes of PTE 97-11. |
03/06/1998
3(2) |
Samuel Arthur Butts III |
Whether the UT Medical Group, Inc. Key Employee Incentive Plan should be considered a “bonus program” rather than a "pension plan" under ERISA section 3(2)(A). |
01/21/1998
3(1) |
Mr. Mark W. Kunst |
Whether a proposed grant from the National Distribution Pipeline Industry Communications and Productivity Fund (Pipeline Fund) to a training fund for Union members would, render the Pipeline Fund an employee welfare benefit plan under ERISA section 3(1). |
AO/ Date/ Reference | Recipient | Description of Request |
---|---|---|
11/07/1997
3(32) |
Mr. Richard J. Tuggle, Jr. |
Whether the Beaufort County Hospital Association, Inc. Employees' Pension Plan is a “governmental plan” within the meaning of ERISA section 3(32), and therefore excepted from ERISA Title I by section 4(b)(1). |
10/24/1997
407(d)(5) 407(f)(1) |
Mr. Larry E. Shapiro |
Whether a redemption or conversion of the same class of publicly-traded preferred stock that is held by a defined benefit plan by holders other than the plan would trigger the application of the ownership limits in ERISA section 407(f)(1). |