"Open" multiple employer plans after Advisory Opinion 2012-04A: an assessment
In Advisory Opinion 2012-04A, the Department of Labor (DOL) for the first time issued an explicit ruling that an "open" multiple employer plan (an Open MEP) is not a single employee benefit pension plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), but a group of singl...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of pension benefits 2012-09, Vol.20 (1), p.17 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 17 |
container_title | Journal of pension benefits |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Reish, Fred Ashton, Bruce Waldbeser, Joshua |
description | In Advisory Opinion 2012-04A, the Department of Labor (DOL) for the first time issued an explicit ruling that an "open" multiple employer plan (an Open MEP) is not a single employee benefit pension plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), but a group of single employer plans. The DOL previously issued a significant number of Advisory Opinions addressing single ERISA plan status for multiple employer pension plans sponsored by employer associations and multiple employer welfare arrangements, and a number of commentators had taken the position that the standards set forth in these prior rulings indicated that Open MEPs were not multiple employer plans. In this article, the authors assess the legal underpinnings of the Opinion and the impact it will have on Open MEP providers and the small employers that participate in them. The analysis takes into account both the legal issues and the policy considerations that it appears are being applied to Open MEPs. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1055173449</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A303451158</galeid><sourcerecordid>A303451158</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g1429-2ac282b6d6da90d30da97d608116df49ac18ad1c3f06cc54a4789c7f0eb870a23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkM1Lw0AQxXNQsFb_h6VejcxmN5vEWyh-QaUXPZfpfsQtySZmEqH_vQv14KHM4Q3D770Hc5EsOKgqlaDkVXJNdADgIpewSN5X28GGFevmdvJDa5nthrY_2pENLQZi6Ka41-bHUz8e2XbwwfeBZcCzFGT9yDAwJLJEnQ3TTXLpsCV7-6fL5PP56WP9mm62L2_repM2XGZVmqHOymyvjDJYgREQpTAKSs6VcbJCzUs0XAsHSutcoizKShcO7L4sADOxTO5OucPYf8-Wpt2hn8cQK3cc8pwXQsoqUumJarC1Ox9cP42oGxvsiG0frPPxXAsQMuc8LyP_cIaPY2zn9VnD_T_DfiYf4iN8IN98TdTgTPQf_wWuFHYb</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1055173449</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>"Open" multiple employer plans after Advisory Opinion 2012-04A: an assessment</title><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Reish, Fred ; Ashton, Bruce ; Waldbeser, Joshua</creator><creatorcontrib>Reish, Fred ; Ashton, Bruce ; Waldbeser, Joshua</creatorcontrib><description>In Advisory Opinion 2012-04A, the Department of Labor (DOL) for the first time issued an explicit ruling that an "open" multiple employer plan (an Open MEP) is not a single employee benefit pension plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), but a group of single employer plans. The DOL previously issued a significant number of Advisory Opinions addressing single ERISA plan status for multiple employer pension plans sponsored by employer associations and multiple employer welfare arrangements, and a number of commentators had taken the position that the standards set forth in these prior rulings indicated that Open MEPs were not multiple employer plans. In this article, the authors assess the legal underpinnings of the Opinion and the impact it will have on Open MEP providers and the small employers that participate in them. The analysis takes into account both the legal issues and the policy considerations that it appears are being applied to Open MEPs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1069-4064</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Aspen Publishers, Inc</publisher><subject>Associations ; Employee benefits ; Employees ; Employers ; ERISA ; Multiemployer pension plans ; Opinions ; Pension plans ; Political activity ; Political aspects ; Retirement plans ; Small business</subject><ispartof>Journal of pension benefits, 2012-09, Vol.20 (1), p.17</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2012 Aspen Publishers, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Aspen Publishers, Inc. Autumn 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Reish, Fred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ashton, Bruce</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waldbeser, Joshua</creatorcontrib><title>"Open" multiple employer plans after Advisory Opinion 2012-04A: an assessment</title><title>Journal of pension benefits</title><description>In Advisory Opinion 2012-04A, the Department of Labor (DOL) for the first time issued an explicit ruling that an "open" multiple employer plan (an Open MEP) is not a single employee benefit pension plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), but a group of single employer plans. The DOL previously issued a significant number of Advisory Opinions addressing single ERISA plan status for multiple employer pension plans sponsored by employer associations and multiple employer welfare arrangements, and a number of commentators had taken the position that the standards set forth in these prior rulings indicated that Open MEPs were not multiple employer plans. In this article, the authors assess the legal underpinnings of the Opinion and the impact it will have on Open MEP providers and the small employers that participate in them. The analysis takes into account both the legal issues and the policy considerations that it appears are being applied to Open MEPs.</description><subject>Associations</subject><subject>Employee benefits</subject><subject>Employees</subject><subject>Employers</subject><subject>ERISA</subject><subject>Multiemployer pension plans</subject><subject>Opinions</subject><subject>Pension plans</subject><subject>Political activity</subject><subject>Political aspects</subject><subject>Retirement plans</subject><subject>Small business</subject><issn>1069-4064</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>N95</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNptkM1Lw0AQxXNQsFb_h6VejcxmN5vEWyh-QaUXPZfpfsQtySZmEqH_vQv14KHM4Q3D770Hc5EsOKgqlaDkVXJNdADgIpewSN5X28GGFevmdvJDa5nthrY_2pENLQZi6Ka41-bHUz8e2XbwwfeBZcCzFGT9yDAwJLJEnQ3TTXLpsCV7-6fL5PP56WP9mm62L2_repM2XGZVmqHOymyvjDJYgREQpTAKSs6VcbJCzUs0XAsHSutcoizKShcO7L4sADOxTO5OucPYf8-Wpt2hn8cQK3cc8pwXQsoqUumJarC1Ox9cP42oGxvsiG0frPPxXAsQMuc8LyP_cIaPY2zn9VnD_T_DfiYf4iN8IN98TdTgTPQf_wWuFHYb</recordid><startdate>20120922</startdate><enddate>20120922</enddate><creator>Reish, Fred</creator><creator>Ashton, Bruce</creator><creator>Waldbeser, Joshua</creator><general>Aspen Publishers, Inc</general><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120922</creationdate><title>"Open" multiple employer plans after Advisory Opinion 2012-04A: an assessment</title><author>Reish, Fred ; Ashton, Bruce ; Waldbeser, Joshua</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g1429-2ac282b6d6da90d30da97d608116df49ac18ad1c3f06cc54a4789c7f0eb870a23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Associations</topic><topic>Employee benefits</topic><topic>Employees</topic><topic>Employers</topic><topic>ERISA</topic><topic>Multiemployer pension plans</topic><topic>Opinions</topic><topic>Pension plans</topic><topic>Political activity</topic><topic>Political aspects</topic><topic>Retirement plans</topic><topic>Small business</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Reish, Fred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ashton, Bruce</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waldbeser, Joshua</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Entrepreneurship Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Journal of pension benefits</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Reish, Fred</au><au>Ashton, Bruce</au><au>Waldbeser, Joshua</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>"Open" multiple employer plans after Advisory Opinion 2012-04A: an assessment</atitle><jtitle>Journal of pension benefits</jtitle><date>2012-09-22</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>17</spage><pages>17-</pages><issn>1069-4064</issn><abstract>In Advisory Opinion 2012-04A, the Department of Labor (DOL) for the first time issued an explicit ruling that an "open" multiple employer plan (an Open MEP) is not a single employee benefit pension plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), but a group of single employer plans. The DOL previously issued a significant number of Advisory Opinions addressing single ERISA plan status for multiple employer pension plans sponsored by employer associations and multiple employer welfare arrangements, and a number of commentators had taken the position that the standards set forth in these prior rulings indicated that Open MEPs were not multiple employer plans. In this article, the authors assess the legal underpinnings of the Opinion and the impact it will have on Open MEP providers and the small employers that participate in them. The analysis takes into account both the legal issues and the policy considerations that it appears are being applied to Open MEPs.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Aspen Publishers, Inc</pub></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1069-4064 |
ispartof | Journal of pension benefits, 2012-09, Vol.20 (1), p.17 |
issn | 1069-4064 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1055173449 |
source | EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
subjects | Associations Employee benefits Employees Employers ERISA Multiemployer pension plans Opinions Pension plans Political activity Political aspects Retirement plans Small business |
title | "Open" multiple employer plans after Advisory Opinion 2012-04A: an assessment |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T13%3A57%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=%22Open%22%20multiple%20employer%20plans%20after%20Advisory%20Opinion%202012-04A:%20an%20assessment&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20pension%20benefits&rft.au=Reish,%20Fred&rft.date=2012-09-22&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=17&rft.pages=17-&rft.issn=1069-4064&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA303451158%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1055173449&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A303451158&rfr_iscdi=true |