Advisory Opinions

This advisory opinion concludes that a self-directed IRA‘s investment in notes of a corporation, a majority of whose stock is owned by the son-in-law of the IRA owner, would be a prohibited transaction under the Internal Revenue Code.

Whether a fiduciary of a defined benefit plan may, consistent with the requirements of section 404 of ERISA, consider the liability obligations of the plan and the risks associated with such liability obligations in determining a prudent investment strategy for the plan.

Whether Chevy Chase Trust Company (CCTC) would be considered a bank, and whether certain collective investment funds for which CCTC acts as trustee would be considered to be maintained by a bank for purposes of PTE 91-38.

Whether the prohibition on the payment of sales commissions in PTE 77-3 applies to the payment of 12b-1 Fees by a proprietary mutual fund to an unrelated broker.

Whether certain employee benefit programs of the Federal Reserve System are excluded from the requirements of Title I under section 4(b)(1) of ERISA as "governmental plan[s]" within the meaning of section 3(32) of ERISA.

Regarding the application of ERISA to trustees' amendment of a plan to permit a retroactive contribution to the plan fund on behalf of an owner of a corporation that contributes to the fund as an employer. Whether such owner who performed work for his own corporation that would otherwise be covered by a collective bargaining agreement if he were not a "supervisor" under federal labor law is an "employee," within the meaning of section 3(6) of ERISA, for purposes of participation under the plan.

PTE 92-6 covers the sale, by an employee benefit plan, of a second to die life-insurance policy to two participants who are husband and wife and who are the insured under the policy. The letter also clarifies that the conditions of PTE 92-6 remain the same despite the amendments to the Internal Revenue Code regarding the tax treatment of certain life-insurance policies distributed from employee benefit plans.

Whether the transfer of residual assets from a terminated MEWA that is also a plan to a VEBA that provides health and life insurance benefits to the employees of the entity that sponsored both the MEWA and the VEBA constitutes an improper inurement of plan assets for the benefit of an employer in violation of section 403, or a prohibited transaction under section 406.

Whether a lease by a company (LLC) 49% owned by an IRA to a company (S) which is a disqualified person with respect to that IRA is a prohibited transaction where the manager of the LLC is an officer of S. Whether 29 CFR 2509.75-2 makes the transaction an indirect prohibited transaction and whether it makes the transaction a violation of the Internal Revenue Code's exclusive benefit rule.

Whether the Tennessee Independent Colleges and Universities Association Benefit Consortium, Inc. Health Plan is an "employee welfare benefit plan" within the meaning of section 3(1) of ERISA that is maintained by a "group or association of employers" within the meaning of section 3(5) of ERISA.