Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- 29 U.S.C. § 1002(21); conflic of interest; conflict of interest rule; 401(k); IRA; individual retirement account; adviser; advisor; investment adviser; investment advisor; five-part test; best interest; best interest standard; prudent man; prudent man standard; benefit; benefit plan; 81 Fed. Reg. 20 (1)
- 928 (1)
- 946; 80 Fed. Reg. 21 (1)
- Ciary; fiduciary rule; standard of care; retirement; investment; investor; retirement investor; retirement saver; retirement savings; Department of Labor; DOL; ERISA; Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974; Section 3(21)(A); Section 3(21); Pub. L. No. 93-406 (1)
- Publication
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Retirement Security Law
Defining “Fiduciary”: Aligning Obligations With Expectations, Ashley C. Vicere
Defining “Fiduciary”: Aligning Obligations With Expectations, Ashley C. Vicere
Brooklyn Law Review
Poor investment decisions rob many Americans of the worry-free retirement for which they had desperately planned. Hiring an investment adviser does not always shield retirement savers from making poor investment decisions because some advisers have conflicts of interest and receive commissions for recommending certain investments. This practice encourages them to recommend products that generate advisers more income rather than products that most benefit investors. To address these conflicts of interest, the Department of Labor (DOL) promulgated a new rule redefining when an investment adviser is a “fiduciary” of a retirement investor under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 …
Personal Injury Victims As Insurance Collection Agents: Erisa Preemption Of State Antisubrogation Laws, Jonathan P. Connery
Personal Injury Victims As Insurance Collection Agents: Erisa Preemption Of State Antisubrogation Laws, Jonathan P. Connery
Journal of Law and Policy
The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) was enacted in 1974 to protect the pension rights of employees nationwide. However, due to its broad preemptive powers, ERISA has since developed into a tool used by health insurers to recover millions of dollars in tort damages meant to benefit employees with ERISA health plans. This practice, known as subrogation, has been met with legislative backlash in the form of state antisubrogation statutes, which attempt to limit the enforceability of subrogation clauses found in almost all ERISA health plans. However, many courts have held that ERISA preempts these antisubrogation statutes, thereby affirming …