Brief Case

Search the Pension Law Library

Limit to:Advanced options
Searches the code/regs in effect on that date.
Words mode supports "quoted phrases", +required and -excluded terms.
Document types:
Go to T.C. Memo. 1994-128 (not yet in the library — opens the official source)
52 documents · 0.07sAllIRCERISAPBGCJoint Board
  1. 81 FR 21181 — Amendment to and Partial Revocation of Prohibited Transaction Exemption (PTE) 86-128 for Securities Transactions Involving Employee Benefit Plans and Broker-De…
    ERISAFinal Rules (FR)Apr 8, 2016related by meaning
    …d below. In connection with publication of this final amendment to and partial revocation of PTE 86-128 and this final amendment to and partial revocation of PTE 75-1, the Department is submitting an ICR to OMB requesting approval of a revision to OMB Control Number 1210-0059. The Department will notify the public when…
  2. 89 FR 32346 — Amendment to Prohibited Transaction Exemptions 75-1, 77-4, 80-83, 83-1, and 86-128
    ERISAFinal Rules (FR)Apr 25, 2024related by meaning
    … Department has deleted the proposed recordkeeping requirements applicable to Section VII of PTE 86-128. However, as with PTE 2020-02, the Department intends to monitor compliance with the exemption closely and may revisit whether expanding the recordkeeping requirement is appropriate in the future. Any future amendmen…
  3. 80 FR 22021 — Proposed Amendment to and Proposed Partial Revocation of Prohibited Transaction Exemption (PTE) 86-128 for Securities Transactions Involving Employee Benefit P…
    ERISAProposed Rules (FR)Proposed Apr 20, 2015related by meaning
    … OMB also are available at http://www.RegInfo.gov. As discussed in detail below, as amended, PTE 86-128 would require financial firms to make certain disclosures to plan fiduciaries in order to receive relief from ERISA's and the Code's prohibited transaction rules for the receipt of commissions and to engage in riskle…
  4. 88 FR 76032 — Proposed Amendment to Prohibited Transaction Exemptions 75-1, 77-4, 80-83, 83-1, and 86-128
    ERISAProposed Rules (FR)Proposed Nov 3, 2023related by meaning
    tionary authority or control with respect to IRAs could continue to rely on PTE 86-128, as long as they comply with all of the exemption's conditions. The Department is also proposing certain technical changes to the exemption, including deleting subsection IV(b)(1), and redesignating remaining sections as needed. The …
  5. DOL Office of Administrative Law Judges — UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION v. T. W. TAGGART
    ERISACourt RulingsAug 25, 1995
    …e penalty on various legal grounds. The cases were consolidated on December 8, 1993. On December 8, 1994 a hearing of these consolidated cases was held in Dallas, Texas. Both parties have submitted proposed Findings of Fact and a Proposed Decision and Order. Pursuant to my order of August 17, 1994, PWBA, Taggart and AM…
  6. DOL Office of Administrative Law Judges — UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION v. SOCIEDAD PARA ASISTENCIA LEGAL MONEY PURCHASE PLAN
    ERISACourt RulingsMar 29, 1995
    ovide reasonable cause for not timely correcting an IQPA report. Thereafter, on June 17, 1994, Respondent filed an answer with this office pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 2570.61(c). On July 14, 1994, I issued a Notice of Docketing which required the parties to file various information relative to this matter. Responses to the…
  7. DOL Office of Administrative Law Judges — U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION v. RICHARD L. SMITH and SMITH ADMINISTRATORS
    ERISACourt RulingsJan 20, 1998
    ng filings required in the Prehearing Order Number One were due on September 30, 1994, 2) the hearing would be rescheduled for the week of October 31, 1994, and 3) interim reports were to be filed with this Office every two weeks detailing the status of the settlement negotiations. Complainant complied with all applica…
  8. DOL Office of Administrative Law Judges — USDOL, EBSA v. PLAN ADMINISTRATOR, HOME OF ECONOMY 401(K) PLAN, HOME OF ECONOMY, INC.
    ERISACourt RulingsJun 26, 2013
    …U.S. Dep’t of Labor, PWBA v. Spalding and Evenflo Companies, Inc. , 1992 - RIS - 19 (PWBA, Nov. 18, 1994); U.S. Dep’t of Labor, EBSA v. Team Laurino 401(k) Plan , 2008 - RIS - 50 (ALJ, Dec. 9, 2008); U.S. Dep’t of Labor, EBSA v. Dutch American Import Co. , 2009 - RIS - 1 4 (ALJ, Jan. 6, 2010); U.S. Dep’t of Labor, EBSA…
  9. DOL Office of Administrative Law Judges — Consolidated Packaging Corporation
    ERISACourt RulingsDec 23, 1994
    …s DOL Home > OALJ > ERISA > 94ris41a.htm USDOL/OALJ Reporter 94ris41a.htm Date Issued: December 23, 1994 Case No.: 94-RIS-41 In the Matter of: CONSOLIDATED PACKAGING CORPORATION, Respondent Before: JOHN M. VITTONE Deputy Chief Judge DECISION AND ORDER This case arises under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act o…
  10. DOL Office of Administrative Law Judges — UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION v. CURRENT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    ERISACourt RulingsFeb 22, 2000
    …led on May 30, 1996, for failure of the two Plans to file Form 5500 C/R's for the Plan Years 1992 - 1994. These were followed by statements of reasonable cause by the Respondent, and the agency responded with two notices of determination on statement of reasonable cause ("NODs"), which were not submitted to the two Pla…
  11. 90 FR 3667 — Prohibited Transaction Exemption (PTE) 2002-51 To Permit Certain Transactions Identified in the Voluntary Fiduciary Correction Program
    ERISAFinal Rules (FR)Jan 15, 2025related by meaning
    … replacing references “to sections of the Code” to instead refer to “Code section.” Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review), and 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review)
  12. 85 FR 81658 — Fiduciary Duties Regarding Proxy Voting and Shareholder Rights
    ERISAFinal Rules (FR)Dec 16, 2020
    …o be minimized and not an asset to be prudently managed. Back to Citation 7.  59 FR 38860 (July 29, 1994). Back to Citation 8.   See 1994 DOL Press Conference, at 2-4, 10, 15-16; see also Leslie Wayne, U.S. Prodding Companies to Activism on Portfolios, N.Y. Times (July 29, 1994), www.nytimes.com/​1994/​07/​29/​business…
  13. 85 FR 55219 — Fiduciary Duties Regarding Proxy Voting and Shareholder Rights
    ERISAProposed Rules (FR)Proposed Sep 4, 2020
    …t of Labor, Transcript of Press Conference on Corporate Activist Role in Pension Planning (July 28, 1994), at 15-16 (then-Secretary Robert Reich stating that IB 94-2 “makes very clear that . . . pension fund managers, trustees, [and] fiduciaries have an obligation to vote proxies” unless the costs “substantially outwei…
  14. ERISACode / StatuteJan 6, 2025
    …s beginning on or after such date. (h)(3)(C)(ii) (ii) Special rule for disabilities occurring after 1994 In the case of disabilities occurring in plan years beginning after December 31, 1994, the tables under clause (i) shall apply only with respect to individuals described in such subclause who are disabled within the…
  15. DOL Office of Administrative Law Judges — UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION v. CROSS MILLS, INC.
    ERISACourt RulingsJul 6, 1994
    …ch Case Status DOL Home > OALJ > ERISA > USDOL, PWBA v. Cross Mills, Inc., 1993-RIS-20 (ALJ July 6, 1994) USDOL/OALJ Reporter 93ris20a.htm DATE: July 6, 1994 CASE NO.: 93-RIS-20 IN THE MATTER OF UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION, Complainant, V. CROSS MILLS, INC., Respondent…
  16. 81 FR 21147 — Amendment to and Partial Revocation of Prohibited Transaction Exemption (PTE) 84-24 for Certain Transactions Involving Insurance Agents and Brokers, Pension Co…
    ERISAFinal Rules (FR)Apr 8, 2016related by meaning
    upremacy when the two regimes cannot be harmonized or accommodated”). Back to Citation 50.   See BancOklahoma Mortg. Corp. v. Capital Title Co., Inc., 194 F.3d 1089 (10th Cir. 1999) (stating that McCarran-Ferguson Act bars the application of a federal statute only if (1) the federal statute does not specifically relate…
  17. DOL Office of Administrative Law Judges — UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION v. CINPAC, INC./LIBBY LEE TOYS, INC.
    ERISACourt RulingsMar 20, 1995★ strong match
    …Administrative Law Judge, and upon agreement of the parties, a hearing was scheduled for August 30, 1994, in Cincinnati, Ohio. On August 10, 1994, the Complainant requested and was granted a continuance, and the hearing was rescheduled to January 25, 1995. On January 5, 1995, the Complainant filed a Motion for a Summar…
  18. DOL Office of Administrative Law Judges — U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION v. BAKERY AND CONFECTIONERY WORKERS LOCAL 125 HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND
    ERISACourt RulingsApr 12, 1995
    …OALJ > ERISA > USDOL, PWBA v. Bakery & Confectionery Workers Local 125 Health & Welfare Trust Fund, 1994-RIS-48 (ALJ Apr. 12, 1995) USDOL/OALJ Reporter USDOL, PWBA v. Bakery & Confectionery Workers Local 125 Health & Welfare Trust Fund, 1994-RIS-48 (ALJ Apr. 12, 1995) U.S. Department of Labor Office of Administrative L…
  19. DOL EBSA (final agency order) — U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION v. SPALDING AND EVENFLO COMPANIES, INC.
    ERISACourt RulingsNov 18, 1994
    …me > OALJ > ERISA > USDOL, PWBA v. SPALDING AND EVENFLO COMPANIES, INC., 1992-RIS-19 (PWBA Nov. 18, 1994) USDOL/OALJ Reporter USDOL, PWBA v. SPALDING AND EVENFLO COMPANIES, INC., 1992-RIS-19 (PWBA Nov. 18, 1994) Date: Nov. 18, 1994 In the Matter of: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION,…
  20. ERISA § 304(c)(6)(D)(v)(II) (29 U.S.C. § 1084) — Minimum funding standards for multiemployer plans
    ERISACode / StatuteJan 6, 2025
    (c)(6)(D)(v)(II) (II) Special rule for disabilities occurring after 1994 In the case of disabilities occurring in plan years beginning after December 31, 1994, the tables under subclause (I) shall apply only with respect to individuals described in such subclause who are disabled within the meaning of title II of the S…