Advisory Opinions

Whether certain deferred prosecution agreements entered into by an investment manager's affiliate constitute criminal "convictions" for purposes of Section I(g) of PTE 84-14, thereby disqualifying the investment manager from acting as a qualified professional asset manager under PTE 84-14.

Whether the delivery of a "summary prospectus" satisfies certain disclosure requirements of PTE 77-4.

This advisory opinion concerns the application of ERISA plan asset and fiduciary obligations to contractual arrangements between plans and service providers whereby a plan obtains credits or rights to share in revenue sharing payments the service provider receives as a result of plan investments.

Whether documents involving participation in the Teamsters Joint Council No. 73 Pension Plan by “officers, business agents, trustees, or clerical employees” of the Joint Council and local unions affiliated with the Joint Council constitute “collective bargaining agreements” for purposes of making an election that the plan be treated as a multiemployer plan pursuant to ERISA section 3(37)(G)(i)(II).

This advisory opinion concerns the application of the fiduciary and prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA to certain “cleared swap” transactions conducted pursuant to provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act.

Whether the Hawaii Laborers’ and Employers’ Cooperation and Education Trust Fund,  a fund established and operated as a labor management cooperation committee under section 302(c)(9) of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 186(c)(9), is an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of section 3(1) of Title I of ERISA.

Whether the requirements for "qualifying employer real property" under ERISA section 407(d)(4)(A) are satisfied when a single parcel of real property is contributed to or sold by a pension plan such that section 408(e) of ERISA would be available for such transaction.

Whether a retirement savings program marketed by 401(k) Advantage LLC as a multiple employer plan would be a single “employee benefit plan” within the meaning of ERISA section 3(2) where multiple unrelated employers adopt the Plan to provide retirement benefits to their employees.

Whether an arrangement to be established by National Retirement Plan, Inc. to merge unrelated abandoned individual account plans would constitute an “employee pension benefit plan” within the meaning of ERISA section 3(2).

Whether the status of a “safe harbor” 403(b) plan under 29 C.F.R. 2510.3-2(f) would be adversely affected if the employer makes “matching” contributions into another pension plan based on the employees’ salary deferrals to the 403(b) plan.