Advisory Opinions

Whether Shearson/American Express Inc. Retirement Plan’s five individual trustees may retain American Express Asset Management to manage assets held in trust with respect to Shearson/American Express Inc. Retirement Plan and any plans that Shearson may maintain in the future, and that Asset Management may be paid reasonable compensation by Shearson and its participating subsidiaries for performing such services, without engaging in a prohibited transaction under section 406 of ERISA.

Whether the retention by the Plan of an undisclosed company to provide services to the Plan as plan administrator and the payment by the Plan of the direct expenses of the undisclosed company allocable to performing such services (which expenses include the reasonable compensation of employees of the undisclosed company) do not constitute prohibited transactions under section 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

Whether the investment of plans assets in the MAS Trust and the provision of services under that collective investment arrangement by MAS would be prohibited under section 406 of ERISA.

Whether the Insurance Plan and Trust of the North Dakota Auto and Implement Dealers (Intrust) constitutes a single "employee welfare benefit plan" within the meaning of section 3(1) of title I of ERISA

Whether fiduciaries of a plan can lawfully rely upon a plan provision to the extent it would purport to establish a trustee's term of appointment as lifetime under section 404(a)(1)(D) of ERISA which requires fiduciaries to act in accordance with the plan documents and instruments, insofar as they are consistent with titles I and IV of ERISA.

Whether certain arrangements involving the transfer of funds by the Pension Plan to the Welfare Plan would be prohibited under section 406 of ERISA, and whether the provision of services by the Pension Plan to the Welfare Plan under the arrangement described would be exempt from the prohibitions of ERISA section 406(a) and 406(b)(2) if the conditions of PTE 76-1 and PTE 77-10 are met.

Whether the Rochester Button Pension Plan for Salaried Employees (the Plan) is required to engage an independent qualified public accountant for purposes of conducting an examination of the financial statements of the Plan for the plan year ending September 30, 1985, pursuant to section 103(a)(3)(A) of ERISA, 29 C.F.R. §2520.103-1 and §2520.104-50,

Whether, and to what extent, the Trust constituted an “employee welfare benefit plan” within the meaning of ERISA section 3(1) subject to the fiduciary and other provisions of title I of ERISA.

Whether the Ettelbrick Shoe Company pension plan constitutes an unfunded plan maintained “primarily for the purpose of providing deferred compensation for a select group of management or highly compensated employees” within the meaning of sections 201(2), 301(a)(3), and 401(a)(1) of title I of ERISA.

Whether a prohibited transaction under section 406 of ERISA would occur if the trustees of the Fund made an investment which was part of an overall agreement obligating an insurance company to invest a specified amount of insurance company assets in construction mortgages within the geographic jurisdiction of the union whose members are participants in the Fund.