Skip to main content

Must-See Episode of "Between Two Daves" on the Topic of Tariffs Available Now!

Qualified May2022 Article3

Fee Litigation with an Odd 'Twist'

A recent class action lawsuit highlights an often neglected but important item of fiduciary concern.

The plaintiffs in this case have asserted claims for breach of the fiduciary duties of prudence and failure to monitor fiduciaries. Nothing new so far, but in addition to naming the typical plan fiduciaries as defendants, the lawsuit also targets members of the board of directors, as well as other officers of the firm who serve on the retirement plan’s fiduciary investment committee.

The complaint indicates that the “Taylor Corporation, ... is the Plan sponsor, the Plan Administrator (as defined in Section 3(16) of ERISA), and a named fiduciary,” (highlights added).

You may be wondering why the board of directors is implicated in this litigation. The reason is that the Taylor Company’s plan document indicates that “the company” is the named fiduciary for the plan. The “named fiduciary” identifies the plan’s primary fiduciary (the main decisionmaker for the company).

In a corporation with a board of directors, where “the company” is identified as the named fiduciary the board is considered to be the main decision-maker on behalf of the company and thus, as a result, the primary fiduciary of the plan per ERISA. Other co-fiduciaries may also be liable for any fiduciary breaches they may be involved with. This is a concept often misunderstood by many plan fiduciaries and members of board of directors.

Fortunately, there is a simple way to offset this liability, if done prior to a fiduciary breach taking place. The solution is to have the board delegate fiduciary responsibilities to individuals or a committee, as permitted by their plan document. The board should formally delegate responsibilities pursuant to formal board action (may be reflected in board meeting minutes or board resolutions) and adopt a committee charter which identifies the company’s intended named fiduciary(ies). Others can be delegated for specific fiduciary responsibilities as co-fiduciaries who should sign on acknowledging their roles and responsibilities. This simple action essentially helps to insulate the board of directors from liability for day-to-day actions taken by delegates that the board may often not even possess knowledge of. That said, the board still remains the named fiduciary under the plan document, so they have a fiduciary responsibility to monitor their delegates. That can be accomplished as simply as reviewing meeting minutes taken by the delegates during the course of the plan year. As long as no action taken by the delegates seems unusual or not in the best interests of participants the board should be relatively insulated from potential liability.

Contact your financial professional for a sample board resolution, Committee Charter, committee acknowledgements, and committee resignation/removal templates. These documents are easily customizable and ready for implementation upon board resolution. It is considered best practices for all plans to utilize these documents as they explicitly identify individuals/entities that are intended to be fiduciaries for the plan’s administrative, operational, and investment responsibilities.

The class action complaint can be found at:
https://si-interactive.s3.amaz...

Related Insights
I Stock 2202941886 IRS Building copy 800px

IRS Publishes Proposed Regulations on SECURE 2.0 Catch-Up Contribution Rules

On January 13, 2025, the IRS published proposed regulations on two SECURE Act 2.0 changes to 401(k) catch-up contribution rules: 1.) increasing the catch-up contribution limit for taxpayers aged 60, 61, 62, or 63 and 2.) requiring Roth treatment of catch-up contributions made by taxpayers who, for the preceding calendar year, receive more than $145,000 in wages from the employer sponsoring the plan. The IRS’s proposal addresses certain issues with respect to these two changes. Learn more.

Read More
I Stock 1980590886 DOL copy 800px

DOL Temporary 'Non-Enforcement Policy' for Small-Balance Transfers to State Unclaimed Property Funds

On January 14, 2024, the Department of Labor (DOL) published a Field Assistance Bulletin (FAB) 2025-01 announcing a “non-enforcement” policy with respect to the transfer of small defined contribution (DC) plan balances ($1,000 or less) belonging to missing participants to a state unclaimed property fund. Plan sponsors, on occasion, must deal with missing plan participants and beneficiaries, and what to do with their plan balances. Find out more.

Read More
Image1 Market Turmoil

Market Turmoil Spurs Trading, But Staying Put Pays Off

The U.S. stock market suffered its worst day in five years on Friday, April 4, following President Donald Trump's announcement of sweeping tariffs. The S&P 500, Nasdaq, and Dow Jones Industrial Average all posted significant losses.

Despite the turbulence, financial experts continue to advise retirement plan investors to “stay the course” rather than react impulsively.

According to Alight Solutions, stock market volatility has already driven a surge in retirement plan trading in early 2025. In the first quarter alone, 0.77% of plan balances were traded—the highest rate since Q3 of 2020. Trading was particularly elevated in March, exceeding the activity seen in the entire fourth quarter of 2024. Despite increased activity, one Alight expert notes that less than 1% of participant assets were actually traded, indicating that most investors are sticking with their long-term strategies. Read more

Read More
Play