定义的捐款 - 原告v。信托队

当美国最高法院发言时，整个行业都可以震惊。上个月，高等法院提出了一个简单，明确而且一致的陈述，可能威胁到4万亿美元裁定的捐款行业。

Overturning a decision by the business-friendly U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that a 401(k) participant has the right to sue an employer for actions that erode the value of his or her plan. Defined-contribution-plan sponsors have been sued before, not least by tort attorneys wielding the blunt instrument of class-action lawsuits. But the Supreme Court’s decision could open the floodgates to “tons of lawsuits,” frets Peter Demmer, chairman and CEO of Sterling Resources, a Paramus, New Jersey–based consultant to defined-contribution-plan service providers. “About 50 million people have 401(k) accounts,” he says, “and all are doing badly in this market.”

401（k）业务已经证明是诱人的诉讼律师，作为原告的酒吧统称。在提取数十亿美元的罚款和从公司的赔偿金额与石棉和烟草相关的弊端的赔偿责任之后，用于过度收费的信用卡客户和误导性股东关于利润，他们在定义的捐款行业中归零作为他们最新的深层预告企业目标。自2006年秋季以来，诉讼当事人向雇主提出了50项诉讼，以便他们管理401（k）方案的方式，更准确地说，没有获得计划服务提供商的最经济交易。

现在公司面临更大的风险。“我将这一决定复制并向所有我所知的人发出过，”Demmer说，其客户在401（k）和其他界定的缴费计划中约为2万亿美元。“像这样的任何最高法院统治都让人担心。”

裁决涉及詹姆斯拉鲁的狭隘情况，他争辩，他的雇主达拉斯的管理咨询公司德沃夫，鲍勃·兼员工，未遵循他的投资指示，他的401（k）150,000美元。该决定意味着参与者在起诉雇主，不再能够证明投资者被伤害为一群人。个人可以起诉据称过度的费用，在选择投资期权或简单的宽松管理方面的疏忽。

“尚未暴露于诉讼之光的埃里萨有很大的地区，”铁路工人和其他雇员申请人的妇女伤害律师杰罗姆施特赫特·杰罗姆斯·施洛克说，他们已经提出了401（k）投资者的事业。圣路易斯公司Schlichter Bogard＆Denton的合作伙伴，Schlichter是关于14级行动诉讼的领导律师代表计划参与者。就像最近在最高法院的案件一样，迄今为止，在401（k）的摇摇欲坠的法律支撑下，最受欢迎的贡献计划的摇摇欲坠，通常允许工人从中选择何处公司，政府或非营业赞助商提供的选择。几乎所有费用都是从投资者的账户资产支付，退休时，计划参与者收到剩下的内容。

1981年介绍，401（k）并不整齐地融入Erisa的现行监管框架。1974年规约是为界定养老金计划而设计的，其中雇主选择投资，支付费用并担保雇员的福利。相比之下，401（k）参与者承担投资风险，其雇主对行政事项的信守责任不太明确。

在John Paul Stevens的律师们撰写的Larue Count中，最高法院承认了界定福利和界定捐款之间的法律差距，得出结论，即埃里达的规定涵盖的“这种危害危害”受到保护。

Schlichter’s suits have accused Fortune 100 companies — including Boeing Co., General Dynamics Corp. and Deere & Co. — of violating their fiduciary responsibilities by not finding out the true costs of transactions and other services that their 401(k) plans were incurring, and for allowing their employees to overpay. Though the main targets are plan sponsors, providers, including Fidelity Investments, ING Insurance and Nationwide Corp., are co-defendants in a few defined contribution complaints filed by Schlichter and others. Without specifying monetary damages, Schlichter’s suits seek refunds of improper or excessive charges, attorneys’ fees and any other relief that courts might find appropriate.

定义贡献行业的早期阶级行动涉及指责，即在储存公司的股票价格上令人慢性下降的全球交叉和世界组织在储存，造成公司股票的股票（k）账户中的员工，使得玫瑰质公开发行的声明的指控失去沉重。基于西雅图的律师事务所Keller Rohrback代表了埃里拉案件的员工，目前有28项诉讼，表示，它已被授予7.5亿美元的损害赔偿 - 从总结区的15亿美元中达到损害 - 从那么叫做所谓的储量西装。

原告酒吧现在有目光投向计划费用s and the nitty-gritty of what they are supposed to cover, which, the lawyers argue, is not clearly disclosed. Keller Rohrback partner Lynn Sarko, who represented 401(k) participants against Enron, says he is considering several suits in cases where, for example, participants are “paying too much” for the mutual fund choices they are offered.

One of Schlichter’s suits, against International Paper Co., challenges common management practices, such as pooling the accounts of several employers or related groups into a master trust to cut administrative expenses. The plaintiffs’ gripe is that the expenses taken out of the underlying investment vehicles — out of the net asset value of the overall fund — are not specified in International Paper’s plan documentation. The suit is awaiting a trial date in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois in East St. Louis. Robert Hunkeler, International Paper’s vice president for investments, declines to comment on the pending litigation.

Twice recently, courts have favored plaintiffs in 401(k) suits. In December, Chief Judge G. Patrick Murphy of the Southern District of Illinois court ordered attorneys for General Dynamics to refile their brief for summary judgment against plaintiffs represented by Schlichter because, at 50 pages, it exceeded the 20-page limit. The judge, however, let his leanings be known, saying that General Dynamics “probably is not entitled” to a dismissal if it could not produce a concise argument on a “question of fact.”

In February, in another case filed by Schlichter, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in St. Louis rejected an appeal by the U.S. subsidiary of Swedish-Swiss power equipment manufacturer ABB and its 401(k) provider, Fidelity Investments, of an earlier decision that had certified class-action status. Schlichter believes that the weight of one or more such legal rulings will ultimately bring reform. Whether or not the Department of Labor, the primary ERISA regulator, imposes hard-and-fast rules for fee disclosure and transparency, plan sponsors will likely see the writing on the wall. Consultant Demmer predicts that Fortune 100 targets will come around to settling their cases out of court, which in turn will encourage others to do the same before defeats and legal costs mount.

The controversy over plan costs and disclosure raises basic questions about ERISA: Does it need fine-tuning to reflect the maturation of defined contribution plans, which since 1997 have held more assets than have defined benefit plans? Or are there regulatory holes so gaping that the retirement industry structure needs an overhaul?

问题中心关于两种计划之间的区别。辩论在一个经济放缓中发挥作用，因为一个老化的劳动力越来越担心其退休巢蛋。“界定的捐款计划根本没有满足他们的承诺，”佛罗里达州海洋岭，佛罗里达州的前证券和交易委员会律师，金钱管理咨询公司基准金融服务的前证券和交易委员会律师，401（k）“达到退休年龄的第一个婴儿潮一代即将到来，在401（k）账户中即将以高成本耗尽和绩效差。”

Gregory Barden，Lewis of Law of Law Curian of Morgan，Lewis＆Bockius在401（k）案件中，刘易斯和Bockius的合作伙伴，持有计划投资者已经相当待遇，主要致力于退休业务的僵局。“拥有精致顾问的较大计划做得很好地监测计划中的费用，”Barden竞争。他说，班诉律师已经向退休事业转移到务实而不是实质性原因。“这些人的数量很大，这些退休计划中的数十亿美元资产和很多人，”Barden笔记。财富100家公司，他补充说，是“胖目标”。

Schlichter在他的收费中得到了非常具体的，钻入收入分摊安排，这是一九九七年正式化的实践，以反映401（k）计划的演变，以提供来自一个基金家族的投资选择。促进选择，401（k）记录人员和投资经理同意分享费用。该实践可与杂货店的货架空间相媲美，生产者 - 投资经理 - 向消费者的总收入支付费用。

但是，记录员对最大化其收入的兴趣可能会与寻求资金的投资者的利益冲突，以最大限度地降低成本并最大化回报。随着班级行动框架的论证，计划赞助商不知道这些过度成本的群体易受信托不负责任的指控。

Schlichter还对他认为误导基准比较的物体。例如，他的国际论文投诉是为了引用晨星统计数据的故障，声明其2004年的费用为“比可比较零售共同基金的30％至70％”。Schlichter认为，在45亿美元，国际纸计划足以指挥，并传递给参与者 - 规模经济决定的机构收费降低。这些可以从低于5个基准器械的资产的5个基点到75个基点，而零售基金费用从80到120个基点。

劳动部门开始激动。12月12日，建议所界定的贡献行业被要求披露计划提案国的某些费用。但有些专家表示，该提案并不完全解决成本问题和信托责任的定义。

“Labor regulators have suggested that bundled providers — firms like Fidelity, Vanguard Group and T. Rowe Price, among others — do not have to specify separately the charges for investment management and for administration,” notes Matthew Hutcheson, an independent fiduciary consultant in Portland, Oregon, who serves plans that collectively have about $3 billion in defined contribution assets. The bundled providers have resisted disclosure of what they consider proprietary information.

In a comment letter to the DoL, Fidelity senior vice president and deputy general counsel Douglas Kant contends that it would be a logistical headache, if not an impossibility, for his firm to track down all the mutual fund companies whose funds are offered to 401(k) investors through its system.

Vanguard Group Ceo-Desigates F.威廉麦克纳比亚III目前，基金公司的机构和国际业务负责人告诉DOL，该公司没有异议从其他管理人员提供资金Vanguard提供给401（k）投资者的其他管理人员的费用信息。但麦克纳布不希望先锋队负责责任该信息的准确性或其他管理者未能提供所需的披露。DOL没有解决康德或麦克纳巴的反对意见。

一些观察家认为，参与者对管理自己的资金的兴趣应该胜过企业保密的必要性。“不得允许商业模式防止受托人履行法律和普遍接受原则所要求的职责和义务，”Hutcheson Notes。最近的最高法院裁决表示，埃里萨“确保授权损害参与者个人中计划资产价值的信托违规作出恢复[401（k）]。”原告的酒吧的下一个发薪日可能在附近。