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.

Data Dictionary

Start Date

Select Reference

**2008**
AO/ Date/ Reference	Recipient	Description of Request
2008-03A 03/21/2008 514 609(b)(3)	Ginni Hain, Director Division of Eligibility, Enrollment & Outreach Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 7500 Security Boulevard, Mail Stop S2-14-26 Baltimore, MD 21244-1850	Whether ERISA would preempt an action by a State Medicaid Agency to recover Medicaid benefit payments made on behalf of individuals who are also participants in ERISA-covered private health insurance plans that require prior authorization for covered health care items or services.
2008-02A 02/08/2008 514(a)	Eugene Scalia, Esq. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036-5306	Whether section 514(a) of ERISA preempts a Kentucky state law that requires an employer to obtain written consent before withholding amounts from an employee's wages for contribution to an ERISA-covered group health or other welfare benefit plan.
2008-01A 01/18/2008	Mr. Stephen M. Saxon Mr. Richard K. Matta Groom Law Group, Chartered 1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20006	Whether the definition of Affiliate in the Underwriter Exemptions includes an entity that is an affiliate of an Affiliate of a member of the Restricted Group as those terms are defined in the Underwriter Exemptions.

**2007**
AO/ Date/ Reference	Recipient	Description of Request
2007-07A 12/21/2007 2509.94-2 404(a)(1)	Thomas J. Donohue President and CEO U.S. Chamber of Commerce 1615 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20062-2000	This letter addresses the impermissible use of pension plan assets to further public policy and political activities through proxy resolutions that have no connection to enhancing the value of a plan’s investment in a company, further clarifying the application of Interpretive Bulletin 94-2 (29 CFR § 2509.94-2).
2007-06A 08/16/2007 514(b)(6)(A)	Edward L. Wender Venable LLP Two Hopkins Plaza, Suite 1800 Baltimore, MD 21201-2978	Whether the Custom Rail Employer Welfare Trust Fund is an "employee welfare benefit plan" within the meaning of section 3(1) of ERISA, and whether it is a "multiple employer welfare arrangement" (MEWA), within the meaning of section 3(40), that is "fully insured" within the meaning of section 514(b)(6)(A) of ERISA.
2007-05A 08/15/2007 3(40) 514(b)(6)	The Honorable Catherine Cortez Masto Attorney General Nevada Department of Justice 555 East Washington Avenue Las Vegas, Nevada 89101-1088	Whether an employee benefit arrangement sponsored by Payroll Solutions Group Limited constitutes a "multiple employer welfare arrangement" within the meaning of section 3(40) of ERISA subject to regulation under the insurance laws of the State of Nevada pursuant to section 514(b)(6) of ERISA.
2007-04A 07/18/2007 406	J. Jerome Coogan, Esq. Coogan, Smith, McGahan, Lorincz, Jacobi & Shanley, LLP 144 Bank Street, P.O. Box 2320 Attleboro, MA 02703	Whether reimbursements of certain monies by a training plan to local unions that are parties in interest to such plan would be a prohibited transaction under ERISA section 406.
2007-03A 06/08/2007 408(b)(8)	John J. Cleary, Esq. Goodwin Procter LLC Exchange Place Boston, MA 02109	Whether a U.S. branch of a foreign bank qualifies as a "bank or trust company" for purposes of exemptions provided under ERISA section 408(b)(8) and PTE 91-38.
2007-02A 02/26/2007 PTE 84-14	Melanie Franco Nussdorf, Esq. Steptoe & Johnson LLP 1330 Connecticut Ave NW Washington DC 20036	Whether the 10% test applicable to pooled investment vehicles under the QPAM class exemption (84-14) does not require consideration of any underlying plan investors in a pooled fund investing in another pooled fund.
2007-01A 01/22/2007 PTE 84-14	Melanie Franco Nussdorf, Esq. Steptoe & Johnson LLP 1330 Connecticut Ave NW Washington DC 20036	Whether transactions between a broker-dealer and a separate account managed by a QPAM under a 401(k) plan fail to satisfy section I(a) of PTE 84-14 where plan participants investing in such account receive investment allocation advice from a subsidiary of the broker-dealer.