Skip to main content

Watch 'Behind Every Bear Market Is an Opportunity' Webinar recording

Revenue Sharing Pic

Revenue Sharing Decisions

As a result of the significant rise in revenue sharing litigation it behooves plan fiduciaries to confirm and document the prudence and appropriateness of any revenue sharing arrangement.

Revenue sharing is the sharing of fees from one service provider (e.g., an investment fund manager) to another service provider (e.g., your record keeper). Revenue sharing may be built into a fund’s asset-based expense ratio if a plan utilizes a higher cost share class. The revenue sharing is often used to offset plan-related expenses rather than having the plan sponsor or participant making direct payment for specific plan services.

A growing number of lawsuits allege that fiduciaries breached their duties of prudence by utilizing investment share classes with “excessive” revenue sharing. It is important to understand that ERISA does not prohibit plans from using revenue sharing to pay plan fees, but plan fiduciaries must be prepared to verify that their compensation arrangements are reasonable and prudent, as these fees are being paid from plan assets. Plan sponsors should be ready to show the prudent process utilized to justify the use of revenue sharing and the ongoing monitoring they undertake to ensure they do not become excessive with the growth of a plan. In the event that a plan sponsor cannot show the prudence of using revenue sharing it is important to know that the Department of Labor (DOL) may find issue with its use and issue directives to plan sponsors to make a plan “whole” via threatened legal actions. In addition, plan participants may initiate class action lawsuits against plan fiduciaries as well.

According to a recent survey from Vanderbilt University, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System more than half the plans surveyed utilize revenue-sharing arrangements with at least one fund on the menu*.

The strongest position for a fiduciary is to have a documented and deliberate decision-making process that considers all relevant factors documenting prudence and the rationale for utilizing revenue sharing.

*A copy of the research paper is available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/p...

Related Insights
401k Match Pic

Have You Met Your Match?

Just how important is a 401(k) match to your employees? It appears to be top of mind, according to Principal’s 2021 Retirement Security Survey. The study’s results show that the match matters most. Learn more.

Read More
Erisa Court Pic

Is Participant Choice a “Get Out of ERISA Court Free Card”?

The question before the court in Hughes v. Northwestern University was the plausibility of a breach of fiduciary duty claim stated by current and former participants in two university retirement plans. SCOTUS ruled that the petitioners in the case, originally dismissed by a district court and upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, did in fact plausibly state their claim. Essentially, the court asserted that the provision of sufficient investment choices to participants does not automatically exculpate fiduciaries from imprudent actions.

Read More
Qualified May2022 Article3

Fee Litigation with an Odd 'Twist'

This article highlights a case whereby the plaintiffs have asserted claims for breach of the fiduciary duties of prudence and failure to monitor fiduciaries. 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. Learn about the simple way of to offset such liability.

Read More
Play