![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Home > Regulation
& Examinations >
Bank Examinations >Trust Examination Manual
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Trust Examination Manual Appendix E Employee Benefit Law Employer Securities and Real Property - General Originally issued September 20, 1977 (42 FR 47201)
Regulation published in Federal Register September 20, 1977 (42 FR 47201) and amended November 22, 1977 (42 FR 59842). Codified to 29 C.F.R. 2550.407a-1. Department of Labor Regulation 2550.407a-2 29 C.F.R. 2550.407a-2. Employer Securities and Real Property - Acquisition Originally issued September 20, 1977 (42 FR 47201)
Department of Labor Regulation 2550.407d-5 29 C.F.R. 2550.407d-5 "Qualifying" Employer Security - Defined Originally issued September 2, 1977 (42 FR 44388)
Department of Labor Regulation 2550.407d-6 29 C.F.R. 2550.407d-6 "Employee Stock Ownership Plan" - Defined Originally issued September 2, 1977 (42 FR 44388)
Department of Labor Regulation 2550.408b-1 29 C.F.R. 2550.408b-1 Loans to Plan Participants and Beneficiaries Originally issued July 20, 1989 (54 FR 30520)
The Internal Revenue Code (the Code) contains parallel provisions to section 408(b)(1) of the Act. Effective, December 31, 1978, section 102 of Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978 (43 FR 47713, October 17, 1978) transferred the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to promulgate regulations of the type published herein to the Secretary of Labor. Therefore, all references herein to section 408(b)(1) of the Act should be read to include reference to the parallel provisions of section 4975(d)(1) of the Code. Section 1114(b)(15)(B) of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 amended section 408(b)(1)(B) of ERISA by deleting the phrase "highly compensated employees, officers or shareholders" and substituting the phrase "highly compensated employees (within the meaning of section 414(q) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986)." Thus, for plans with participant loan programs which are subject to the amended section 408(b)(1)(B), the requirements of this regulation should be read to conform with the amendment.
Example (1): T, a trustee of plan P, has exclusive discretion over the management and disposition of plan assets. As a result, T is a fiduciary with respect to P under section 3(21)(A) of the Act and a party in interest with respect to P pursuant to section 3(14)(A) of the Act. T is also a participant in P. Among T's duties as fiduciary is the administration of a participant loan program which meets the requirements of section 408(b)(1) of the Act. Pursuant to strict objective criteria stated under the program, T, who participates in all loan decisions, receives a loan on the same terms as other participants. Although the exercise of T's discretion on behalf of himself may constitute an act of self-dealing described in section 406(b)(1), section 408(b)(1) provides an exemption from section 406(b)(1). As a result, the loan from P to T would be exempt under section 408(b)(1), provided the conditions of that section are otherwise satisfied. Example (2): P is a plan covering all the employees of E, the employer who established and maintained P. F is a fiduciary with respect to P and an officer of E. The plan documents governing P give F the authority to establish a participant loan program in accordance with section 408(b)(1) of the Act. Pursuant to an arrangement with E, F establishes such a program but limits the use of loan funds to investments in a limited partnership which is established and maintained by E as general partner. Under these facts, the loan program and any loans made pursuant to this program are outside the scope of relief provided by section 408(b)(1) because the loan program is designed to operate for the benefit of E. Under the circumstance described, the diversion of plan assets for E's benefit would also violate sections 403(c)(1) and 404(a) of the Act. Example (3): Assume the same facts as in Example 2, above, except that F does not limit the use of loan funds. However, E pressures his employees to borrow funds under P's participant loan program and then reloan the loan proceeds to E. F, unaware of E's activities, arranges and approves the loans. If the loans meet all the conditions of section 408(b)(1), such loans will be exempt under that section. However, E's activities would cause the entire transaction to be viewed as an indirect transfer of plan assets between P and E, who is a party in interest with respect to P, but not the participant borrowing from P. By coercing the employees to engage in loan transactions for its benefit, E has engaged in separate transactions that are not exempt under section 408(b)(1). Accordingly, E would be liable for the payment of excise taxes under section 4975 of the Code. Example (4): Assume the same facts as in Example 2, above, except that, in return for structuring and administering the loan program as indicated, E agrees to pay F an amount equal to 10 percent of the funds loaned under the program. Such a payment would result in a separate transaction not covered by section 408(b)(1). This transaction would be prohibited under section 406(b)(3) since F would be receiving consideration from a party in connection with a transaction involving plan assets. Example (5): F is a fiduciary with respect to plan P. D is a party in interest with respect to plan D. Section 406(a)(1)(B) of the Act would prohibit F from causing P to lend money to D. However, F enters into an agreement with Z, a plan participant, whereby F will cause P to make a participant loan to Z with the express understanding that Z will subsequently lend the loan proceeds to D. An examination of Z's credit standing indicates that he is not creditworthy and would not, under normal circumstances, receive a loan under the conditions established by the participant loan program. F's decision to approve the participant loan to Z on the basis of Z's prior agreement to lend the money to D violates the exclusive purposes requirements of sections 403(c) and 404(a). In effect, the entire transaction is viewed as an indirect transfer of plan assets between P and D, and not a loan to a participant exempt under section 408(b)(1). Z's lack of credit standing would also cause the transaction to fail under section 408(b)(1)(A) of the Act. Example (6): F is a fiduciary with respect to Plan P. Z is a plan participant. Z and D are both parties in interest with respect to P. F approves a participant loan to Z in accordance with the conditions established under the participant loan program. Upon receipt of the loan, Z intends to lend the money to D. If F has approved this loan solely upon consideration of those factors which would be considered in a normal commercial setting by an entity in the business of making comparable loans, Z's subsequent use of the loan proceeds will not affect the determination of whether loans under P's program satisfy the conditions of section 408(b)(1). Example (7): A is the trustee of a small individual account plan. D, the president of the plan sponsor, is also a participant in the plan. Pursuant to a participant loan program meeting the requirements of section 408(b)(1), D applies for a loan to be secured by a parcel of real property. D does not intent to repay the loan; rather, upon eventual default, he will permit the property to be foreclosed upon and transferred to the plan in discharge of his legal obligation to repay the loan. A, aware of D's intention, approves the loan. D fails to make two consecutive quarterly payments of principal and interest under the note evidencing the loan thereby placing the loan in default. The plan then acquires the real property upon foreclosure. Such facts and circumstances indicate that the payment of money from the plan to D was not a participant loan eligible for the relief afforded by section 408(b)(1). In effect, this transaction is a prohibited sale or exchange of property between a plan and a party in interest from the time D receives the money. Example (8): Plan P establishes a participant loan program. All loans are subject to the condition that the borrowed funds must be used to finance home purchases. Interest rates on the loans are the same as those charged by a local savings and loan association under similar circumstances. A loan by P to a participant to finance a home purchase would be subject to the relief provided by section 408(b)(1) provided that the conditions of 408(b)(1) are met. A participant loan program which is established to make loans for certain stated purposes (e.g., hardship, college tuition, home purchases, etc.) but which is not otherwise designed to benefit parties in interest (other than plan participants) would not, in itself, cause such program to be ineligible for the relief provided by section 408(b)(1). However, fiduciaries are cautioned that operation of a loan program with limitations may result in loans not being made available to all participants and beneficiaries on a reasonably equivalent basis.
Example (1): T, a trustee of plan P, has exclusive discretion over the management and disposition of plan assets. T's duties include the administration of a participant loan program which meets the requirements of section 408(b)(1) of the Act. T receives a participant loan at a lower interest rate than the rate made available to other plan participants of similar financial condition or creditworthiness with similar security. The loan by P to T would not be covered by the relief provided by section 408(b)(1) because loans under P's program are not available to all plan participants on a reasonably equivalent basis. Example (2): Same facts as in example 1 except that T is a member of a committee of trustees responsible for approving participant loans. T pressures the committee to refuse loans to other qualified participants in order to assure that the assets allocated to the participants loan program would be available for a loan by P to T. The loan by P to T would not be covered by the relief provided by section 408(b)(1) since participant loans have not been made available to all participants and beneficiaries on a reasonably equivalent basis. Example (3): T is the trustee of plan P, which covers the employees of E. A, B and C are employees of E, participants in P, and friends of T. The documents governing P provide that T, in his discretion, may establish a participant loan program meeting certain specified criteria. T institutes such a program and tells A, B and C of his decision. Before T is able to notify P's other participants and beneficiaries of the loan program, A, B, and C file loan applications which, if approved, will use up substantially all of the funds set aside for the loan program. Approval of these applications by T would represent facts and circumstances showing that loans under P's program are not available to all participants and beneficiaries on a reasonably equivalent basis.
Example (1): The documents governing plan P provide for the establishment of a participant loan program in which the amount of any loan under the program (when added to the outstanding balance of any other loans under the program to the same participant) does not exceed the lesser of (i) $50,000, or (ii) one-half of the present value of that participant's vested accrued benefit under the plan (but not less than $10,000). P's participant loan program does not fail to meet the requirement in section 408(b)(1)(B) of the Act, and would be covered by the relief provided by section 408(b)(1) if the other conditions of that section are met. Example (2): The documents governing plan T provide for the establishment of a participant loan program in which the minimum loan amount would be $25,000. The documents also require that the only security acceptable under the program would be the participant's vested accrued benefit. A, the plan fiduciary administering the loan program, finds that because of the restrictions in the plan documents only 20 percent of the plan participants, all of whom earn in excess of $75,000 a year, would meet the threshold qualifications for a loan. Most of these participants are high-level supervisors or corporate officers. Based on these facts, it appears that loans under the program would be made available to highly compensated employees in an amount greater than the amount made available to other employees. As a result, the loan program would fail to meet the requirements in section 408(b)(1)(B) of the Act and would not be covered by the relief provided in section 408(b)(1).
Example (1): Plan P authorizes the trustee to establish a participant loan program in accordance with section 408(b)1) of the Act. Pursuant to this explicit authority, the trustee establishes a written program which contains all of the information required by section 2550.408b-1(d)(2). Loans made pursuant to this authorization and the written loan program will not fail under section 408(b)(1)(C) of the Act merely because the specific provisions regarding such loans are contained in a separate document forming part of the plan. The specific provisions describing the loan program whether contained in the plan or in a written document forming part of a plan, do affect the rights and obligations of the participants and beneficiaries under the plan and, therefore, must in accordance with section 102(a)(1) of the Act, be disclosed in the plan's summary plan description.
Example (1): Plan P makes a participant loan to A at the fixed interest rate of 8% for 5 years. The trustees, prior to making the loan, contacted two local banks to determine under what terms the banks would make a similar loan taking into account A's creditworthiness and the collateral offered. One bank would charge a variable rate of 10% adjusted monthly for a similar loan. The other bank would charge a fixed rate of 12% under similar circumstances. Under these facts, the loan to A would not bear a reasonable rate of interest because the loan did not provide P with a return commensurate with interest rates charged by persons in the business of lending money for loans which would be made under similar circumstances. As a result, the loan would fail to meet the requirement of section 408(b)(1)(D) and would not be covered by the relief provided by section 408(b)(1) if the Act. Example (2): Pursuant to the provisions of plan P's participant loan program, T, the trustee of P, approves a loan to M, a participant and party in interest with respect to P. At the time of execution, the loan meets all of the requirements of section 408(b)(1) of the Act. The loan agreement provides that at the end of two years M must pay the remaining balance in full or the parties may renew for an additional two year period. At the end of the initial two year period, the parties agree to renew the loan for an additional two years. At the time of renewal, however, A fails to adjust the interest rate charged on the loan in order to reflect current economic conditions. As a result, the interest rate on the renewal fails to provide a "reasonable rate of interest" as required by section 408(b)(1)(D) of the Act. Under such circumstance, the loan would not be exempt under section 408(b)(1) of the Act from the time of renewal. Example (3): The documents governing plan P's participant loan program provide that loans must bear an interest rate no higher than the maximum interest rate permitted under State X's usury law. Pursuant to the loan program, P makes a participant loan to A, a plan participant, at a time when the interest rates charged by financial institutions in the community (not subject to the usury limit) for similar loans are higher than the usury limit. Under these circumstances, the loan would not bear a reasonable rate of interest because the loan does not provide P with a return commensurate with the interest rates charged by persons in the business of lending money under similar circumstances. In addition, participant loans that are artificially limited to the maximum usury ceiling then prevailing call into question the status of such loans under sections 403(c) and 404(a) where higher yielding comparable investment opportunities are available to the plan.
Department of Labor Regulation 2550.408b-2 29 C.F.R. 2550.408b-2 Services or Office Space Class Exemption Originally issued June 24, 1977 (42 FR 32390)
Example (1). E, an employer whose employees are covered by plan P, is a fiduciary of P. I is a professional investment adviser in which E has no interest which may affect the exercise of E's best judgment as a fiduciary. E causes P to retain I to provide certain kinds of investment advisory services of a type which causes I to be a fiduciary of P under section 3(21)(A)(ii) of the Act. Thereafter, I proposes to perform for additional fees portfolio evaluation services in addition to the services currently provided. The provision of such services is arranged by I and approved on behalf of the plan by E. I has not engaged in an act described in section 406(b)(1) of the Act, because I did not use any of the authority, control or responsibility which makes I a fiduciary (the provision of investment advisory services) to cause the plan to pay I additional fees for the provision of the portfolio evaluation services. E has not engaged in an act which is described in section 406(b)(1). E, as the fiduciary who has the responsibility to be prudent in this selection and retention of I and the other investment advisers of the plan, has an interest in the purchase by the plan of portfolio evaluation services. However, such an interest is not an interest which may affect the exercise of E's best judgment as a fiduciary. Example (2). D, a trustee of plan P with discretion over the management and disposition of plan assets, relies on the advice of C, a consultant to P, as to the investment of plan assets, thereby making C a fiduciary of the plan. On January 1, 1978, C recommends to D that the plan purchase an insurance policy from U, an insurance company which is not a party in interest with respect to P. C thoroughly explains the reasons for the recommendation and makes a full disclosure concerning the fact that C will receive a commission from U upon the purchase of the policy by P. D considers the recommendation and approves the purchase of the policy by P. C receives a commission. Under such circumstances, C has engaged in an act described in section 406(b)(1) of the Act (as well as sections 406(b)(2) and (3) of the Act) because C is in fact exercising the authority, control or responsibility which makes C a fiduciary to cause the plan to purchase the policy. However, the transaction is exempt from the prohibited transaction provisions of section 406 of the Act, if the requirements of Prohibited Transaction Exemption 77-9 are met. Example (3). Assume the same facts as in Example (2) except that the nature of C's relationship with the plan is not such that C is a fiduciary of P. The purchase of the insurance policy does not involve an act described in section 406(b)(1) of the Act (or sections 406(b)(2) or (3) of the Act) because such sections only apply to acts by fiduciaries. Example (4). E, an employer whose employees are covered by plan P, is a fiduciary with respect to P. A, who is not a party in interest with respect to P, persuades E that the plan needs the services of a professional investment adviser and that A should be hired to provide the investment advice. Accordingly, E causes P to hire A to provide investment advice of the type which makes A a fiduciary under 2510.3-21(c)(1)(ii)(B). Prior to the expiration of A's first contract with P, A persuades E to cause P to renew A's contract with P to provide the same services for additional fees in view of the increased costs in providing such services. During the period of A's second contract, A provides additional investment advice services for which no additional charge is made. Prior to the expiration of A's second contract, A persuades E to cause P to renew his contract for additional fees in view of the additional services A is providing. A has not engaged in an act described in section 406(b)(1) of the Act, because A has not used any of the authority, control or responsibility which makes A a fiduciary (the provision of investment advice) to cause the plan to pay additional fees for A's services. Example (5). F, a trustee of plan P with discretion over the management and disposition of plan assets, retains C to provide administrative services to P of the type which makes C a fiduciary under section 3(21)(A)(iii). Thereafter, C retains F to provide for additional fees actuarial and various kinds of administrative services in addition to the services F is currently providing to P. Both F and C have engaged in an act described in section 406(b)(1) of the Act. F, regardless of any intent which he may have had at the time he retained C, has engaged in such an act because F has, in effect, exercised the authority, control or responsibility which makes F a fiduciary to cause the plan to pay F additional fees for the services. C, whose continued employment by P depends on F, has also engaged in such an act, because C has an interest in the transaction which might affect the exercise of C's best judgment as a fiduciary. As a result, C has dealt with plan assets in his own interest under section 406(b)(1). Example (6). F, a fiduciary of plan P with discretionary authority respecting the management of P, retains S, the son of F, to provide for a fee various kinds of administrative services necessary for the operation of the plan. F has engaged in an act described in section 406(b)(1) of the Act because S is a person in whom F has an interest which may affect the exercise of F's best judgment as a fiduciary. Such act is not exempt under section 408(b)(2) of the Act irrespective of whether the provision of the services by S is exempt. Example (7). T, one of the trustees of plan P, is president of bank B. The bank proposes to provide administrative services to P for a fee. T physically absents himself from all consideration of B's proposal and does not otherwise exercise any of the authority, control or responsibility which makes T a fiduciary to cause the plan to retain B. The other trustees decide to retain B. T has not engaged in an act described in section 406(b)(1) of the Act. Further, the other trustees have not engaged in an act described in section 406(b)(1) merely because T is on the board of trustees of P. This fact alone would not make them have an interest in the transaction which might affect the exercise of their best judgment as fiduciaries. Department of Labor Regulation 2550.408b-3 29 C.F.R. 2550.408b-3 Loans to Employee Stock Ownership Plans Originally issued September 2, 1977 (42 FR 44385) Technical corrections September 13, 1977 (42 FR 45907) Amended April 30, 1984 (49 FR 18295)
The payments made with respect to an exempt loan by the ESOP during a plan year must not exceed an amount equal to the sum of such contributions and earnings received during or prior to the year less such payments in prior years. Such contributions and earnings must be accounted for separately in the books of account of the ESOP until the loan is repaid.
Example. Corporation X establishes an ESOP that borrows $750,000 from a bank. X guarantees the loan which is for 15 years at 5% interest and is payable in level annual amounts of $72,256.72. Total payments on the loan are $1,083,850.80. The ESOP uses the entire proceeds of the loan to acquire 15,000 shares of X stock which is used as collateral for the loan. The number of securities to be released for the first year is 1,000 shares, i.e., 15,000 shares x $72,256.72/$1,083,850.80 = 15,000 shares x 1/15. The number of securities to be released for the second year is 1,000 shares, i.e., 14,000 shares x $72,256.72/$1,011,594.08 = 14,000 shares x 1/14. If all loan payments are made as originally scheduled, the number of securities released in each succeeding year of the loon will also be 1,000.
Department of Labor Regulation 2550.408b-4 29 C.F.R. 2550.408b-4 Investment in Own-Bank Interest-Bearing Deposits Originally issued June 24, 1977 (42 FR 32392)
Section 408(b)(4) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (the Act) exempts from the prohibition of Section 406 of the Act the investment of all or a part of a plan's assets in deposits bearing a reasonable rate of interest in a bank or similar financial institution supervised by the United States or a State, even though such bank or similar financial institution is a fiduciary or other party in interest with respect to the plan, if the conditions of either Part 2550.408b-4(b)(1) or Part 2550.408b-4(b)(2) are met. Section 408(b)(4) provides an exemption from Section 406(b)(1) of the Act (relating to fiduciaries dealing with the assets of plans in their own interest or for their own account) and 406(b)(2) of the Act (relating to fiduciaries in their individual or in any other capacity acting in any transaction involving the plan on behalf of a party -- or representing a party -- whose interests are adverse to the interests of the plan or the interests of its participants or beneficiaries), as well as Section 406(a)(1), because Section 408(b)(4) contemplates a bank or similar financial institution causing a plan for which it acts as a fiduciary to invest plan assets in its own deposits if the requirements of Section 408(b)(4) are met. However, it does not provide an exemption from Section 406(b)(3) of the Act (relating to fiduciaries receiving consideration for their own personal account from any part dealing with a plan in connection with a transaction involving the assets of the plan). The receipt of such consideration is a separate transaction not described in the statutory exemption. Section 408(b)(4) does not contain an exemption from other provisions of the Act, such as Section 404, or other provisions of law which may impose requirements or restrictions relating to the transactions which are exempt under Section 408(b)(4) of the Act. See, for example, Section 401 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (Code). The provisions of Section 408(b)(4) of the Act are further limited by Section 408(d) of the Act (relating to transactions with owner-employees and related persons).
Note: Also refer to ERISA Section 408(b)(4), "Investment in Own-Bank Interest-Bearing Deposits". Department of Labor Regulation 2550.408b-6 29 C.F.R. 2550.408b-6 Ancillary Services by Banks or Similar Financial Institutions Originally issued June 24, 1977 (42 FR 32392) Technical corrections of July 18, 1977 (42 FR 36823) did not contain any changes to this regulation
Department of Labor Regulation 2550.408c-2 29 C.F.R. 2550.408c-2 Originally issued June 24, 1977 (42 FR 32393)
Department of Labor Regulation 2550.408e 29 C.F.R. 2550.408e Qualifying Employer Securities and Real Estate Acquisition or Sale of Qualifying Employer Securities Acquisition/Sale/Lease of Qualifying Employer Real Estate Originally issued August 1, 1980 (45 FR 51197)
Department of Labor Regulation 2570.30 through .52 29 C.F.R. 2570.30 through .52 Individual and Class Prohibited Transaction Exemption Requests (Replaces ERISA Procedure 75-1) Originally issued August 10, 1990 (55 FR 32847) § .35 Amended through April 12, 1991 (56 FR 14861) Agency: Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, Labor. Action: Final regulation and removal of interim final regulation. Summary: This document contains a final regulation that describes the procedures for filing and processing applications for exemptions from the prohibited transaction provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code), and the Federal Employees' Retirement System Act of 1986 (FERSA). At this time, the Department is also removing an interim regulation which describes the exemption procedures under FERSA because such regulation is superseded by the final regulation contained herein. The Secretary of Labor is authorized to grant exemptions from the prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA, the Code, and FERSA and to establish an exemption procedure to provide for such exemptions. The final regulation updates the description of the Department of Labor's procedures to reflect changes in the Department's exemption authority and to clarify the procedures by providing a more comprehensive description of the prohibited transaction exemption process.
Section 406 of ERISA prohibits certain transactions between employee benefit plans and "Parties in interest" (as defined in section 3(14) of ERISA). In addition, sections 406 and 407(a) of ERISA impose restrictions on plan investments in "employer securities" (as defined in section 407(d)(1) of ERISA) and "employer real property" (as defined in section 407(d)(2) of ERISA). Most of the transactions prohibited by section 406 of ERISA are likewise prohibited by section 4975 of the Code, which imposes an excise tax on those transactions to be paid by each "disqualified person" (defined in section 4975(e)(2) of the Code in virtually the same manner as the term "party in interest") who participates in the transactions. Both ERISA and the Code contain various statutory exemptions from the. prohibited transaction rules. In addition, section 408(a) of ERISA authorizes the Secretary of Labor to grant administrative exemptions from the restrictions of ERISA sections 406 and 407(a) while section 4975(c)(2) of the Code a authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate to grant exemptions from the prohibitions of Code section 4975(c)(1). Sections 408(a) of ERISA and 4975(c)(2) of the Code direct the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of the Treasury, respectively, to establish procedures to carry out the purposes of these sections. Under section 3003(b) of ERISA, the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of the Treasury are directed to consult and coordinate with each other with respect to the establishment of rules applicable to the granting of exemptions from the Prohibited transaction restrictions of ERISA and the Code. Under section 3004 of ERISA, moreover, the Secretaries are authorized to develop jointly rules appropriate for the efficient administration of ERISA. Pursuant to these provisions, the Secretaries jointly issued an exemption procedure on April 28, 1975 (ERISA Proc. 75-1, 40 FR 18471. also issued as Rev. Proc. 75-26, 1975-1 C.B. 722). Under these procedures, a person seeking an exemption under both section 408(a) of ERISA and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code was obliged to file an exemption application with the Rules and Regulations of the Internal Revenue Service as well as with the Department of Labor. Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978 (43 FR 47713, October 17, 1918, effective on December 31, 1978), transferred the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to issue exemptions under section 4975 of the Code, with certain enumerated exceptions, to the Secretary, of Labor. As a result, the Secretary of Labor now possesses authority under section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, as well as under section 408(a) of ERISA, to issue individual and class exemptions from the prohibited transaction rules of ERISA and the Code. The Secretary has delegated this authority, along with most of his other responsibilities under ERISA, to the Assistant Secretary for Pension and Welfare Benefits. See Secretary of Labor's Order 1-87, 52 FR 13139 (April 21, 1987). FERSA also contains prohibited transaction rules that are applicable to parties in interest with respect to the Federal Thrift Savings Fund established by ERISA, and the Secretary of Labor is directed to prescribe, by regulation, a procedure for granting administrative exemptions from certain of those prohibited transactions. See 5 USC 8477(c)(3). On June 28, 1988, the Department published a proposed rule in the Federal Register (53 FR 24422) updating ERISA Procedure 75-1 to reflect the changes made by Reorganization Plan No. 4 and extending the procedure to applications for exemptions from the FERSA prohibited transaction rules. In addition, the proposed regulation codified various procedures developed by PWBA since the adoption of ERISA Proc. 75-1. Formal adoption of those procedures will facilitate review of exemption applications. These new procedures also fill in some of the gaps left in ERISA Proc. 75-1. thereby providing a more detailed description both of the steps to be taken by applicants in applying for exemptions and the steps normally taken by the Department in processing such applications. Finally, the proposed regulation modified some of the procedures described in ERISA Proc. 75-1 to better serve the needs of the administrative exemption program as demonstrated by the Department's experience with the program over the previous fourteen years. These amendments were intended to promote the prompt and fair consideration of all exemption applications. The notice of proposed rulemaking gave interested persons an opportunity to comment on the proposal. In response, the Department received three letters of comment regarding several aspects of the proposed regulation. The following discussion summarizes the proposed regulation and the issues raised by the commentators and explains the Department's reasons for adopting the provisions of the final regulation. The Scope of the Regulation As explained in the notice of proposed rulemaking, the regulation establishes new procedures to replace ERISA Proc. 75-1. These new procedures reflect changes in the Department of Labor's exemption authority effected by Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978. Thus, the procedures apply to all applications for exemption which the Department has authority to issue under section 408(a) of ERISA, or, as a result of Reorganization Plan No. 4, under section 4975(c)(2) of the Code. The procedures reflect current practice under which the Department generally treats any exemption application filed solely under section 408(a) of ERISA or solely under section 4275(c)(2) of the Code as an application for exemption filed under both of these sections if the application relates to a transaction prohibited under corresponding provisions of both ERISA and the Code. The grant of an exemption by the Department in such instances protects disqualified persons covered by the exemption from the excise taxes otherwise assessable under section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code. However, the procedures do not apply to applications for exemption reserved to the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Treasury by Reorganization Plan No. 4. To ascertain the correct procedures for filing and processing applications for these exemptions, applicants should consult the Internal Revenue Service. The Department has also concluded that it is appropriate to apply the procedures provided here to exemption applications filed under FERSA, as well as those filed under ERISA or the Code, as provided by proposed § 2570.30, which has been adopted without change in the final regulation. Although the prohibited transaction provisions of FERSA and the scope of the Department's exemptive authority under FERSA differ somewhat from that under ERISA and the Code, administrative exemption matters under FERSA are likely to involve many of the issues as are presented by similar matters involving private plans. Thus, adopting uniform procedures should help assure uniform administration of the exemption programs. Applications for Exemption under FERSA On December 29, 1988, the Department published an interim regulation in the Federal Register (29 C.F.R. part 2585, 53 FR 52088) describing the procedures for filing and processing applications for exemptions from the prohibited transaction provisions of FERSA. For such applications, the interim regulation adopted the procedures then currently followed (pursuant to ERISA Proc. 75-1) by applicants for exemptions from the prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA and the Code. The interim final regulation was effective commencing December 29, 1988 until the effective date of the final regulation contained herein for all prohibited transaction exemption applications (under ERISA, the Code and FERSA).1 Section 2585.12 of the interim regulation provides that this regulation shall expire on the effective date of the revised prohibited transaction exemption procedure, published in proposed form on June 28, 1988, 53 FR 24422, and that the Department will publish a document removing these interim regulations when it adopts final regulations based on the published proposal. Accordingly, this notice of final rulemaking removes the interim regulations, as of September 10, 1990, the effective date of the final regulation contained herein. In regard to FERSA exemption applications, the Department received a comment relating to the adoption of ERISA class exemptions for FERSA purposes. This comment suggested that the final regulation clarify that the Department will follow the procedure authorized under section 8477(c)(3)(E) of FERSA, which permits the Secretary of Labor to determine that an exemption granted for any class of fiduciaries or transactions under section 408(a) of ERISA shall constitute an exemption for FERSA purposes upon publication of notice in the Federal Register without affording interested parties opportunities to present their views (in writing or at a hearing). The procedures described in the preceding paragraph was not used in conjunction with the Department's adoption for FERSA purposes of a number of specific class exemptions under ERISA (for example, Prohibited Transaction Exemptions (PTE) 75-1, 78-19, 80-26, 80-51, 82-63 and 86-128). In that instance, the Department published in the Federal Register both a notice of proposed adoption of class exemptions under ERISA (53 FR 38105, September 29, 1988), which invited the public to submit written comments or requests for a hearing on the proposed adoption, and also a notice of final adoption of these class exemptions (PTE T88-1, 53 FR 52838, December 29, 1988). In this regard, the Department notes that, with respect to ERISA class exemptions which may be proposed in the future and which may also be relevant under FERSA, the Department will solicit the views of the Executive Director of the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board in advance of the publication of the proposed exemption to determine whether such exemption should also be proposed for FERSA purposes. Also regarding FERSA exemption applications, the Department received another comment requesting clarification that the mere existence of routine audit activity conducted by the Department pursuant to the requirements of section 8477(g) of FERSA2 will not provide a basis for denial of, or failure to consider, an application for exemption under FERSA. It is the view of the Department that those audits conducted by the Department in carrying out its responsibilities in connection with its regular program of compliance audits under FERSA section 8477(g) would not constitute an "investigation" for purposes of § 2570.33(a)(2) and 2570.37(b) of the regulation3 or an "examination" for purposes of § 2570.35(a)(7).4 The Department would not, however, be precluded from denying, or failing to consider, an application based on an investigation prompted by information arising as a result of such a routine audit. Definitions Section 2570.31 of the proposed regulation defined the following terms for purposes of the exemption procedures: affiliate, class exemption, Department, exemption transaction, individual exemption, and party in interest. No comments were received regarding these definitions which are adopted in the final regulation as proposed. However, the Department has added to this section a definition of the term "pooled fund" in response to a comment requesting that a special rule be added to the final regulation regarding information to be furnished in exemption applications relating to plans affected by an exemption transaction undertaken by a pooled investment vehicle. (This comment is discussed in more detail below.) Who May Apply for Exemptions Section 2570.32(a) of the proposed regulation provided that exemption proceedings may be initiated by the Department either on its own motion or upon the application of: (1) Any party in interest to a plan which is or may be a party to the exemption transaction, (2) any plan which is a party to the exemption transaction, or (3) an association or organization representing parties in interest who may be parties to an exemption transaction covering a class of parties in interest or a class of transactions. One of the comments received recommended modifying this paragraph of the regulation to permit an exemption application to be filed by any fiduciary or prospective fiduciary with respect to plan assets under such fiduciary's management or control, regardless of whether such fiduciary either represents a specific plan with respect to the exemption application or would be a party to the exemption transaction. The commentator clarified his comment by explaining that he intended this category of applicants to cover prospective fiduciaries, such as persons creating and/or managing a new investment vehicle in which plans are expected to participate if the requested exemption is granted, but in which no plans participate at the time the exemption application is filed. The commentator noted that in the past the Department has granted individual exemptions to institutional investment managers in connection with their investment management of individual plans' investment accounts or pooled investment funds in which several unidentified plans may participate. In the Department's view, the reference in proposed § 2570.32(a)(1) to "any party in interest to a plan who is or may be a party to the exemption transaction" includes the prospective fiduciaries mentioned by the commentator. Therefore, § 2570.32(a) is adopted in the final regulation without change. Section 2570.32(b) and (c) of the proposed regulation set forth simplified rules relating to representation of applicants by third parties. No comments were received regarding these paragraphs, which are adopted in the final regulation without change. Applications the Department Will Not Ordinarily Consider Section 2570.33(a) of the proposed regulation described the circumstances under which the Department will not ordinarily consider the merits of an exemption application. Thus, this paragraph provided that the Department will not ordinarily consider an incomplete application. In this regard, the Department emphasizes that applicants should not file exemption applications until they have compiled all the information required by § 2570.34 and, if applicable, § 2570.35, and can submit this information in an organized and comprehensive fashion together with all necessary supporting documents and statements. In addition, the proposal made it clear that the Department ordinarily will not consider applications that involve a transaction, or a party in interest with respect to such transaction, that is the subject of an ERISA enforcement action or investigation. In certain cases, however, the Department may exercise its discretion to consider exemption applications in these categories where, for example, deficiencies in the exemption application are merely technical, or where an enforcement matter is clearly unrelated to the exemption transaction. One comment was received specifically regarding investigations, and it is discussed above under the heading "Applications for Exemption under FERSA." In addition, the Department has amended § 2570.33(a)(2) (relating to certain investigations and enforcement actions) to conform to a similar revision to § 2570.35(a)(7) (discussed below) made in response to two other comments received regarding the proposed requirement to include information in an application concerning certain investigations, examinations, litigation, or continuing controversy involving specified Federal agencies with respect to any plan or party in interest involved in the exemption transaction. The effect of these amendments is to expand the proposed regulation in order to broaden the scope of exemption applications which the Department will ordinarily consider. No comments were received on paragraphs (b) and (c) of proposed § 2570.33, which are adopted without change in the final regulation. These paragraphs relate to the Department's written explanation to an applicant whose exemption application the Department has decided not to consider, and to applications for individual exemption relating to transaction(s) covered by a class exemption under consideration by the Department. Exemption Application Contents - General Information As previously noted in the proposed regulation, the Department's experience to date with the administrative exemption program suggests that the program's efficiency could be increased and applicants can receive more timely treatment of their applications for exemption if the quality of exemption applications filed were improved. In the past, applications have been incomplete, have omitted or misstated facts or legal analyses needed to justify requests for exemptive relief, and in some cases have been so poorly drafted that the details of the transactions for which exemptive relief is sought ("exemption transactions") are unclear. The time and effort required to deal with such deficient applications and to obtain accurate and complete information about exemption transactions have contributed to processing delays. Moreover, in many exemption applications, the discussion of the substantive basis for the exemption does not take adequate account of positions adopted by the Department with respect to other similar applications. The proposed regulation attempted to address these problems in a number of ways. First, the proposal required that applicants provide more complete information in their applications about exemption transactions and about the plans and the parties in interest involved in those transactions. The Department's experience suggests that this additional information is very helpful, and often essential, for a complete understanding of the exemption transaction and of the context surrounding it, and that the omission of such additional information in exemption applications will delay review of these applications on their merits. For the same reason the proposed regulation required filing with the exemption copies of the relevant portions of documents. By filing comprehensive applications with necessary supporting documentation, applicants can do much to facilitate the Department's review of requested exemptions and to expedite the exemption process as a whole. To further expedite the exemption process, the proposed regulation required that an applicant include with his application a statement explaining why the requested exemption satisfies requirements set forth in sections 408(a) of ERISA and 4975(c)(2) of the Code and 5 USC 84711(c)(3)(C) that an exemption be:
This requirement is not new. Under ERISA Proc. 75-1, applicants have been required to include with their applications statements explaining why a requested exemption satisfies the statutory prerequisites for an exemption. Too often, however, applicants have attempted to satisfy this requirement with generalizations and perfunctory assurances about the benefits to be reaped by plans and their participants and beneficiaries from the proposed exemption. The Department will not seek out reasons to grant an exemption that has not been adequately justified by an applicant. Indeed, the Department considers that it is the responsibility of applicants to demonstrate clearly that exemptions they are requesting meet statutory criteria. Accordingly, under both the proposed and the final regulation, applicants are expected to review the statutory criteria for granting administrative exemptions and explain with as much specificity as possible why a requested exemption would pose no administrative problems, what benefits affected plans and their participants and beneficiaries can expect to receive from it, and what conditions word be attached to protect the rights of participants and beneficiaries of affected plans.5 Under ERISA Proc. 75-1, applicants have been given the option, but have not been required, to submit a draft of the proposed exemption. Both the proposed and the final regulation preserve this option. However, while not requiring the submission of a draft of the proposed exemption, the Department recommends that applicants include in their exemption applications draft language which defines the scope of the requested exemption, including the specific conditions under which the proposed exemption would apply. A draft which explains the exemption requested in a clear and concise manner and focuses on what the applicant considers to be the essential features of the exemption transaction and the critical safeguards supporting the requested relief is likely to facilitate the process of review. Obviously, the degree of detail necessary to describe the proposed exemption adequately will vary depending on the complexity of the transaction and the kind of relief requested. Section 2570.34 of the proposed regulation listed the information that is required in every exemption application, whether it be an application for individual or class exemption. In addition, the information specified in § 2570.35 of the regulation must be included in applications for individual exemptions. Some specific items of information are described below. Shared Representation Section 2570.34(a)(3) of the proposed regulation required each exemption application to disclose whether the same person will represent both the plan and the parties in interest involved in an exemption transaction in matters relating to the application. The proposal noted that such shared representation may raise questions under the exclusive purpose and prudence requirements of sections 403(b) and 404(a) of ERISA and under the prohibited transaction provisions of section 406 of ERISA and section 4975(c)(1) of the Code. No comments have been received regarding this subparagraph, which is adopted as proposed. Third-Party Declarations Section 2570.34(b)[5)(iii) of the proposed regulation required a declaration under penalty of perjury to accompany specialized statements from third-party experts submitted to support an exemption application, such as appraisals, analyses of market conditions, or opinions of independent fiduciaries. Specifically, the proposal required a declaration under penalty of perjury that to the best of the expert's knowledge and belief, the representations made in the specialized statement are true and correct. This declaration was to be dated and signed by the expert who prepared the statement. One of the commenters urged deletion of this requirement and expressed concern that it would cause additional expense to applicants because new third-party statements would be required once the appraiser, engineer, financial specialist, or other expert became aware of their intended use as part of an exemption application. The commentator advised subsequently that such experts either may be reluctant to provide any sort of attestation because of unknown liabilities which may arise by using the expert's report as part of an exemption application, or may seek an additional, and perhaps substantial, fee for furnishing an attestation due to the unknown liabilities. In this regard the Department notes that, with respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States, it is a crime, punishable by a fine of up to $10,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years, for anyone knowingly and willfully to falsify, conceal or cover up by any trick, scheme or device a material fact; to make any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations; or to make or use any false writing or document knowing the same contains any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry (18 USC 1001). It is the view of the Department that this provision applies to applicants for exemptions under ERISA, the Code, or FERSA, to fiduciaries (independent or otherwise) representing the plan in an exemption, transaction, and to third-party experts who prepare statements or reports that such experts know will be included in exemption applications. Nevertheless, the Department recognizes that third-party experts, such as appraisers, bankers, financial analysts, and other specialized consultants usually do not function as fiduciaries with respect to a plan if such experts authority, responsibility, or contact with respect to the plan is limited to providing an opinion which may be included in an exemption application, and which will be considered by plan fiduciaries who will decide what, if any, action they will take on behalf of the plan based upon such opinion. The Department believes that such experts need not be held to the same degree of accountability regarding exemption applications covering transactions where a plan fiduciary has the authority and responsibility to make decisions on behalf of a plan. Thus, the Department has decided to modify proposed § 2570.34(b)(5)(iii) to provide that a statement of consent, rather than a declaration under penalty of perjury, is required from each such expert which acknowledges that his or her statement is being submitted to the Department as part of an exemption application. The Department believes that such a consent statement from a third-party expert will not require an applicant to obtain a new report from the expert because the expert's consent statement may refer to his or her previously issued report. (However, the Department may require an updated report in any case if the substantive information contained in a report submitted with an exemption application is out of date.) Conversely, where an independent fiduciary represents the plan in an exemption transaction, that fiduciary is subject to all of the responsibilities imposed by part 4 of subtitle B of title A of ERISA. None of the comments received questioned the need for such a fiduciary to provide the declaration under penalty of perjury required under the proposed regulation, and the Department has decided to retain this proposed requirement for such plan fiduciaries in the final regulation. As a result, the Department has modified § 2570.34(b)(5)(ii) and has added § 2570.34(b)(5)(iv) to clarify that a declaration is required for such plan fiduciaries, Pooled Funds One comment suggested that § 2570.35 of the proposed regulation be modified to provide a special rule regarding information to be included in an application for an individual exemption involving a pooled investment fund, such as a pooled separate account maintained by an insurance company or a collective investment fund maintained by another financial institution. The commentator pointed out that, as proposed, § 2570.35 would require information to be submitted regarding each plan participating in a pooled investment fund, resulting in the submission of an overwhelming volume of information unrelated to the exemption transaction. However, the commentator recognized that information regarding certain plans may be relevant to the exemption application in view of the potential for conflicts of interest involving such plans. Such plans would include any plan maintained for employees of the sponsor or other fiduciary of the pooled investment fund, and a plan whose participation in the pooled fund exceeded a specified percentage of the total fund assets. The Department agrees with this comment and, accordingly, has added a new paragraph (c) to § 2570.35, which contains a special rule for applications for individual exemptions involving pooled funds [as defined in § 2570.31(g)]. Subparagraph (1) of § 2570.35(c) excepts such applications from including certain information otherwise required relating to among other things: reportable events under section 4043 of ERISA, notice of intent to terminate a plan (section 4041 of ERISA), the number of participants and beneficiaries of each plan participating in the pooled fund, and the percentage of each such plan's assets involved in the exemption transaction. Subparagraph (2) of the special rule provides that certain information otherwise required by § 2570.35(a) and (b) of the regulation must be furnished by reference to the pooled fund rather than the plans participating in such fund. This information pertains to: Identifying information; any prior violations of the Code's exclusive benefit rule or of the prohibited transaction provisions of the Code, ERISA or FERSA, any prior applications for exemption from such prohibited transaction provisions; any lawsuits or criminal actions regarding conduct with respect to any employee plan; any criminal convictions described in section 411 of ERISA; any investigation or continuing controversy with specified Federal agencies regarding compliance with ERISA, Code provisions relating to employee plans, or FERSA provisions relating to the Federal Thrift Savings Fund; whether the exemption transaction has been consummated and, if so, certain related information regarding correction of the prohibited transaction and payment of excise taxes; the identification of persons with investment discretion over any assets involved in the exemption transaction and each such person's relationship to the parties in interest involved in the exemption transaction; investments involving certain parties in interest, the fair market value of the pooled fund; the identity of the person who will pay the costs of the exemption application, notifying interested persons, and the fee of any independent fiduciary involved in the exemption transaction; and an analysis of the facts relevant to the exemption transaction as reflected in documents submitted with the application. The pooled fund, rather than participating plans, must also furnish copies of all relevant documents, including, for example, the most recent financial statements of the pooled fund. Subparagraph (3) of the special rule requires information to be furnished with pooled fund exemption applications with respect to: the aggregate number of plans expected to participate in the pooled fund, and the limits (if any) imposed by the pooled fund on the amount or percentage of each participating plan's assets that may be invested in the pooled fund. Subparagraph (4) of § 2570.35(c) contains additional requirements for applications for individual exemptions involving pooled funds. These requirements apply to plans whose investments in the pooled fund represent more than 20% of the pooled fund's total assets6 and those plans covering employees of the pooled fund's sponsor, and other fiduciaries with discretion over pooled fund assets. The Department believes that additional information is warranted in those situations where the potential for decision making that may inure to the benefit of a fiduciary or other party in interest is increased. For each of these plans, the additional requirements provide for the furnishing of certain individual plan information described in 2570.35(a), in addition to the information required under § 2570.35(c)(2) and (c)(3). The Department believes this information is necessary for its determination as to whether sufficient protections are incorporated into the exemption transaction. The Department further notes that the decision by the fiduciaries of certain plans to invest in a pooled fund may involve a separate prohibited transaction, apart from any prohibited transaction which may be entered into by the pooled fund itself In this regard, the Department notes that the information required to be submitted on behalf of such plans is to be provided in accordance with the general rule contained in § 2570.35, rather than the special rule for pooled funds. Finally, the Department believes that the special rule for pooled funds is less burdensome to applicants than the rules set forth in the proposed regulation. As noted by a commentator, the proposed regulation would have required the submission of voluminous amounts of material, as information would have to be submitted on behalf of each plan investing in a pooled fund. The final regulation limits the amount of material to be submitted since it requires only information relating to the pooled fund and, where applicable, certain plans investing in the pooled fund. In addition, the Department believes that its ability to analyze and process applications for exemption involving pooled funds will be enhanced by this special rule. In this regard, the Department believes that the final regulation eliminates a significant amount of material that otherwise would have been required. Lawsuits, Certain Criminal Convictions, Investigations, Examinations, Continuing Controversies, etc. Sections 2570.35(a)(5), (6), and (7) of the proposed regulation required exemption applications to disclose information regarding whether the applicant or any of the parties to the exemption transaction is or has been, within a specified number of years past, a defendant in any lawsuit or criminal action concerning conduct as a fiduciary or other party in interest with respect to any employee benefit plan (§ 2570.35(a)(5)(b) convicted of a crime described in section 411 of ERISA (§ 2570.35(a)(6)), or under investigation or examination or engaged in litigation or a continuing controversy with certain Federal agencies (§ 2570.35(a)(7)). Proposed § 2570.35(a)(7) also required disclosure of whether any plan affected by the exemption transaction has been under such investigation, examination, litigation, or any controversy, and further required the applicant to submit copies of all correspondence with the specified Federal agencies regarding substantive issues involved in such investigation, etc. Two of the comments urged deletion of the disclosure requirements of proposed § 2570.35(a)(5) and (7) on the basis that such disclosure is difficult, costly, and almost always irrelevant to the exemption transaction. The Department continues to believe that the proposed disclosure is relevant to the exemption transaction. With regard to § 2570.35(a)(5) (relating to lawsuits or certain criminal actions), the Department views the disclosure required as directly concerning the conduct of the applicant and other parties in interest participating in the exemption transaction. The Department believes that such information is necessary in evaluating the credibility and integrity of such parties, some of whom may possess substantial discretion regarding the exemption transaction or may make representations upon which the Department must rely in determining whether the statutory criteria for an exemption have been satisfied. In addition, the proposed disclosure assists the Department in ensuring that the exemption contains appropriate safeguards. Further, the Department does not agree that the disclosure required by § 2570.35(a)(5) imposes any "significant" burdens on applicants. The Department believes that prudent fiduciaries would in the normal course of carrying out their responsibilities, ascertain such information about the parties they intend to deal with in investment and other plan transactions. However, the Department has determined that it would be appropriate to modify proposed § 2570.35(a)(5) in the final regulation to limit disclosure to the applicant or any of the parties in interest involved in the exemption transaction. Regarding the disclosure required by proposed § 2570.35(a)(7) (relating to, investigations, examinations, litigation, and continuing controversy by or with the specified Federal agencies), the Department believes that such information is necessary to ensure that the Department's exemption activities do not compromise its enforcement efforts. Although the Department is most interested in information involving investigations, etc. that are directly related to the subject exemption transactions and the participating parties, the Department believes, nevertheless, that its exemption staff, and not the applicants, should determine which investigations, examinations, etc., are relevant. One of the comments further suggested that it is inappropriate to require applicants to disclose matters which have resulted in no formal allegations of violations of law. The Department notes, however, that the affected parties may include, as part of their disclosure, any qualification or explanations they deem appropriate for consideration by the Department, including information on the final disposition of any matter; Another commentator suggested that disclosure under § 2570.35(a)(7) be limited to a reference to the investigation or litigation without requiring submission of copies of "all correspondence" involved in the investigation. In this regard, the Department notes that the proposed regulation did not require submission of copies of all correspondence, but only of correspondence relating to the, substantive issues involved in the investigation, examination, litigation, or controversy. Specifically, the Department intended to require submission of copies of correspondence containing only that information directly relevant to determining whether or not the requested exemption should be granted. After considering the comment, the Department has modified § 2570.35(a)(7) to clarify that the phrase "substantive issues" refers to issues related to compliance with the provisions of parts 1 and 4 of subtitle B of title I of ERISA (reporting and disclosure (part 1) and fiduciary responsibility (part 4)), section 4975 of the Code, or sections 8477 or 8478 of FERSA (fiduciary responsibilities, liability and penalties (section 8477) and bonding (section 8478). Copies of correspondence relating to any of these substantive issues is necessary in order for the Department to determine the effect the requested exemption may have on the Department's enforcement activities in each case under investigation, examination, etc. One of the comments noted that proposed § 2570.35(a)(5), (6) and (7) required the disclosure of information regarding any parties to the exemption transaction and suggested limiting the disclosure to fiduciaries authorizing the transaction and any parties in interest involved in the exemption transaction. This comment pointed out that investment transactions may involve multiple parties, many of wham are neither plan fiduciaries nor parties in interest. After due consideration, the Department agrees with this suggestion and, accordingly, has modified § 2570.35(a)(5), (6) and (7) to limit the required disclosure to any parties in interest involved in the exemption transaction. The Department rates that this group includes, among others, the fiduciary authorizing the exemption transaction. See the heading "Applications for Exemption under FERSA," above, regarding modification to proposed § 2570.35(a)(7) as applicable to the Federal Thrift Savings Plan established by FERSA. Party-in-Interest Investments Proposed § 2570.35(a)(16) required an application for individual exemption to disclose information regarding any plan investments in loans to, property leased to, or securities issued by, any party in interest involved in the exemption transaction. One of the comments suggested deletion of this requirement due to the difficulty of identifying such investments in view of the "look-through" rule contained in the Department's plan asset regulation (29 C.F.R. 2510.101). This comment suggested that the proposed disclosure may invoke many transactions, by an entity whose underlying assets include "plan assets," which are totally unrelated to the exemption transaction. The comment further indicated that this disclosure would be burdensome for exemption transactions involving numerous parties in interest, such as those involving pooled funds. The Department agrees that, for exemption applications involving pooled funds, furnishing the proposed disclosure could be burdensome inasmuch as such applications generally do not relate to specific plans. Accordingly, the Department has adopted a special rule for applications for individual exemption involving pooled funds, discussed above (under the heading "Pooled Funds"), which limits this type of disclosure to the pooled fund and to certain plans participating therein. Regarding exemption applications involving specific individual plans, it appears to the Department that the information to be disclosed under proposed § 2570.35(a)(16) must be maintained, in any event, to satisfy the annual reporting requirements of section 103 of ERISA, as well as the recordkeeping requirements of section 107. Therefore, the Department believes that this disclosure requirement should not impose any additional burdens on the applicant. The information to be disclosed will enable the Department to determine whether the exemption transaction, in conjunction with other plan investments involving parties in interest, would unduly concentrate the plan's assets in such investments so as to raise questions under the fiduciary responsibility provisions of section 404 of ERISA. For these reasons, the Department has decided to adopt § 2570.35(a)(16) as proposed, subject to the special rule for applications for individual exemption involving pooled funds in § 2570.35(c). Costs Related to the Exemption Application Proposed § 2570.35(a)(18) and (19) required the exemption application to identify the person who will bear the costs of the exemption application, of notifying interested persons, and of the fee charged by any independent fiduciary involved in the exemption transaction. The preamble to the proposed regulation noted that a plan's payment of the expenses associated with the filing or processing of an exemption application raises questions under the fiduciary responsibility and the prohibited transaction restrictions to the extent that any party in interest benefits from the transaction for which an exemption is sought (see section 406(a)(1)(D) of ERISA). One of the commentators requested that the Department provide a more specific discussion of when it believes such questions will be raised. The comment states that, in many cases, it is appropriate for the plan to pay the expenses attributable to obtaining an exemption, and that an independent fiduciary's fees are generally paid by the plan receiving such fiduciary's services in order to ensure that such fiduciary conducts its activities in a totally independent manner and without any potential influence from persons other than the plan paying such fees. The proposed disclosure of who pays the fees for an exemption application is intended to enable the Department to review the appropriateness of such payment by a plan in the context of a specific exemption request. Such disclosure is also intended to aid the exemption staff in evaluating whether the economic merits of the transaction, taking into account the costs attributable to the exemption application, support a finding that the proposed transaction is in the interests of the plan and its participants and beneficiaries. While the Department agrees that there may be certain instances in which it would be appropriate for a plan to pay all or part of the costs attendant with obtaining an exemption, such as where it is necessary to ensure the independence of an independent fiduciary or third-party expert, the Department believes that the propriety of such payments by a plan is an inherently factual determination which can be made only on a case-by-case basis. In this regard, the Department notes that, when evaluating the propriety of the payment by a plan of certain expenses, plan fiduciaries must first consider the general fiduciary responsibility provisions of sections 403 and 404 of ERISA. Section 403(c)(1) provides, in part, that the assets of an employee benefit plan shall never inure to the benefit of any employer and shall be held for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits to participants and beneficiaries and defraying reasonable expenses of administering the plan. Similarly, section 404(a)(1)(A) requires, in part, that a fiduciary of a plan discharge his duties for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits to participants and their beneficiaries and defraying reasonable expenses of administering the plan. Thus, a payment that is not a distribution of benefits to participants or beneficiaries of a plan would not be consistent with the requirements of sections 403(c)(1) and 404(a)(1)(A) unless it was used to defray a reasonable expense of administering the plan. In addition, section 406(a)(1)(D) of ERISA prohibits a fiduciary with respect to a plan from causing the plan to engage in a transaction if he knows or should know that such transaction constitutes a direct or indirect transfer to, or use by or for the benefit of, a party in interest of any assets of the plan. It is the responsibility of appropriate plan fiduciaries to determine whether a particular expense is a reasonable administrative expense under sections 403(c)(1) and 404(a)(1)(A) of ERISA or whether plan payment of an expense would constitute a prohibited use of plan assets for the benefit of a party in interest under section 406(a)(1)(D) of ERISA. Copies of Documents Section 2570.35(b)(1) of the proposed regulation required each application for individual exemption to include true copies of all documents bearing on the exemption transaction, such as contracts, deeds, agreements, instruments, and relevant portions of plan documents, including trust agreements. One comment objected to this requirement on the grounds that having to assemble the required documents is time consuming, costly, and unnecessary if the exemption application properly describes all pertinent plan provisions and other documents in sufficient detail to allow the Department to evaluate the merits of the exemption transaction. In this regard, the Department notes that the documents with respect to which copies are requested are all documents which would be readily available to the parties to the exemption transaction. Accordingly, the Department does not believe that there would be a significant burden in either compiling the documents or in transmitting copies to the Department. Further, the Department notes that it is not uncommon for representations contained in an exemption application to be inconsistent with the provisions of the governing documents or for the latter to contain provisions with respect to which clarifications or other representations are needed in order for the requested exemption to be proposed. On the basis of the Department's experience with exemptions, scrutiny of the relevant documents is, in the large majority of cases, a necessary prerequisite to a complete understanding of the exemption transaction and the implications for affected plans and parties in interest. Moreover, in the Department's experience, the inclusion of copies of the requested documents, as part of the exemption application, has expedited the processing of the requested exemption. For these reasons, the final regulation adopts proposed § 2570.35(b)(1) without change. However, the Department wishes to clarify three points regarding this requirement. -
Where To File an Application Although no comments were received regarding this section, which is adopted as proposed, the Department wishes to advise applicants that including the room number of the Division of Exemptions in the address will generally expedite its delivery. The current room number of the Division of Exemptions, Room N-5671, is not included in the regulation to avoid the need to amend the regulation every time the room, number of the Division changes. Duty To Amend and Supplement Information The proposed regulation contained the requirement established in ERISA Proc. 75-1 that an applicant promptly notify the Division of Exemptions if he discovers that any material fact or representation contained in his application, or in any supporting documents or testimony, was inaccurate or if any such fact or representation changes. However, the proposed regulation added the requirement that an applicant notify the Division of Exemptions when anything occurs that may affect the continuing accuracy of such facts or representations. Two comments received indicated confusion as to the expiration date of the duty to update information submitted as part of an exemption application. Accordingly, the final Regulation clarifies § 2570.37(a) and (b) to indicate that such duty applies only during the pendency of the exemption application and expires after the exemption is granted. The Department also wishes to clarify that, in § 2570.37(a), the phrase "continuing accuracy of any such fact or representation" refers to future events or changes known before the exemption is granted that will render inaccurate facts stated or representations made before such grant. The Department wishes to note that exemptions are granted only to transactions as described. Therefore, if an exemption is granted and the transaction is not as described in some material aspect, the exemption does not take effect or protect parties in interest from liability for the transaction. See § 2570.49 of the regulation. Tentative Denial Letters Although ERISA Proc. 75-1 established no procedures to be followed by the Department in denying exemption applications or by applicants in responding to such denials, the Department has developed procedures over the years to notify applicants first to the tentative and, later, of the final denial of their applications. In large part, the proposed regulation codified these procedures. Under the proposed regulation, the Department may decide to deny an exemption request at any of a number of stages in the review process. For example, it may decide after its initial review of an application that the requested exemption does not satisfy the statutory criteria set forth in sections 408(a) of ERISA and 4975(c)(2) of the Code. In that event, the Department will send a tentative denial letter to the applicant pursuant to § 2570.38 of the regulation. That letter will inform the applicant of the Department's tentative decision to deny the application and of the reasons therefore. Under § 2570.38, an applicant has 20 days from the date of this letter to request a conference with the Department and/or to notify the Department of his intern to submit additional information in writing to support the application. If the Department receives no request for a conference and no notice of intent to submit additional information within that time, it will send the applicant a final denial letter pursuant to § 2570.41 of the regulation. One of the comments received suggested that: (1) The final regulation should clarify that the Department's exemption staff may request applicants to provide additional information before a tentative denial letter is issued, and (2) rather than a "short statement" of the reasons for a tentative denial, the tentative denial letter should provide a detailed explanation of the basis for the Department's decision. Regarding the first suggestion, the comment indicates that it is unreasonable to expect an applicant to anticipate, when the exemption application is filed, all of the material which the Department may find pertinent to its consideration of an exemption application. As stated above (under the heading "Exemption Application Contents - General Information), the Department's view is that the applicant bears the responsibility to demonstrate clearly that the requested exemption meets the statutory criteria. While nothing in the proposed regulation would preclude the Department's exemption staff from exercising its discretion and contacting an applicant for a clarification or additional information, the Department anticipates that such contact will be limited to exemption applications which, upon initial review, meet the essential requirements of the regulation. It is not administratively feasible to expect the Department's exemption staff to solicit information in every case. Moreover, such a procedure would, in effect, shift the burden of developing the exemption application from the applicant to the exemption staff. Similarly, the imposition of a requirement that tentative denial letters detail all the reasons for the denial would, in effect, shift the analytical burden from the applicant to the Department. As with the circumstances under which additional information is solicited from applicants, the Department believes that the degree of detail required for a tentative denial letter should be left to the discretion of the exemption staff. The Department believes that a general statement of the reasons for a tentative denial is sufficient inasmuch as the issuance of a tentative denial letter does not terminate the exemption proceedings. Rather, the tentative denial letter offers the applicant the opportunity to have a conference and/or to submit additional information for consideration. In addition, a requirement to issuer a comprehensive and detailed tentative denial letter in most cases would significantly increase the time required to conclude a final action. For these reasons, the Department has decided to adopt proposed § 2570.38 without change. Opportunities To Submit Additional Information Section 2570.39 of the proposed regulation provided that if an applicant wishes to submit additional information in support of a tentatively denied exemption application, he may notify the Department of his intention to do so within the prescribed 20-day period either by telephone or by letter. After issuing such a notice, an applicant has 30 days from the date of the notice to furnish additional information to the Department. If an applicant notifies the Department of his intent to submit additional information but requests no conference, and subsequently fails to submit the promised information within the prescribed 30-day period, the Department will issue the applicant a final denial letter pursuant to § 2570.41 of the regulation. However, an applicant who realizes that he will be unable to submit his additional information within the allotted time may avoid receiving a final denial letter by withdrawing his application before the end of the 30-day period pursuant to § 2570.44. As an alternative to withdrawing his application, an applicant who, for reasons beyond his control, is unable to meet the 30-day deadline may request an extension of time for filing additional information, pursuant to § 2570.39 of the regulation. However, the Department will grant such extensions of time only in unusual circumstances. No comments were received on this section of the proposed regulation which is adopted without change in the final regulation. Conferences Section 2570.40 of the proposed regulation described the procedures regarding conferences on exemption applications which the Department has tentatively decided to deny. Under this proposed section, an applicant is entitled to only one conference with respect to any exemption application, and is also given 20 days after the date of any conference to submit to the Department in writing any additional data or arguments discussed at the conference but not previously or adequately presented in writing. Under the proposal, an applicant is deemed to have waived his right to a conference if he fails, without good cause, to appear for a scheduled conference or to schedule a conference for any of the times proposed by the Department within the 45-day period following the receipt of his request for a conference. Proposed § 2570.40 is adopted without change in the final regulation. The only comment received regarding this proposed section suggested that the Department continue its practice of informally consulting with applicants on exemption applications in addition to holding conferences. In this regard, the Department will continue to informally contact applicants as it deems appropriate. Final Denial Letters Proposed § 2570.41 is adopted without change in the final regulation. No comments were received on this section which specifies the circumstances in which the Department may issue a final denial letter denying a requested exemption. In most cases, the same procedure will also be followed in denying exemptions that the Department has already proposed through publication of a notice of proposed exemption in the Federal Register. However, in cases where the Department holds a hearing on an exemption, § 2570.41(a)(3) of the proposed regulation allowed the Department to issue a final denial letter without first issuing a tentative denial letter and without providing the applicant with the opportunity for a conference. In the Department's view, where a hearing on a proposed exemption is conducted, the applicant and other proponents of the exemption have adequate opportunity to present their views and other evidence in support of the exemption. Notice of Proposed Exemption The proposed regulation did not significantly alter the procedures established by ERISA Proc. 75-1 for granting an exemption. Under § 2570.42 of the regulation, the Department will publish a notice of proposed exemption in the Federal Register if, after reviewing an exemption application and any additional information submitted by an applicant, the Department tentatively concludes that the requested exemption satisfies the statutory criteria for the granting of an exemption and that the requested exemption is otherwise appropriate. This proposed section also described the contents of the notice of proposed exemption. No comments were received on proposed § 2570.42, which is adopted without change in the final regulation. Notifying Interested Persons Like ERISA Proc. 75-1, the proposed regulation required applicants to provide notice to interested persons in the event that the Department decides to propose the exemption. Section 2570.34 of the proposal required an applicant to submit with his application a description of the interested persons to whom notice will be provided and a description of the manner in which the applicant proposed to provide notice. That section also required an applicant to provide an estimate of the time he will need to furnish notice to interested persons following publication of a notice of proposed exemption. Section 2570.43 of the proposed regulation provided guidance on methods an applicant may use to notify interested persons of a proposed exemption and indicated what must be included in the notice. In addition to the Notice of Proposed Exemption published in the Federal Register, the applicant must include in the notification to interested persons a supplemental statement. Section 2570.43 also stated that, once the Department has published a notice of proposed exemption, the applicant must notify the interested persons described in his application in the manner indicated in the application unless the Department has informed the applicant beforehand that it considers the method of notification described in the application to be inadequate. Where the Department has so informed an applicant, it will also secure from the applicant an agreement to provide notice in the time and manner and to the persons designated by the Department. After furnishing notification, an applicant must provide the Department with a declaration under penalty of perjury certifying that notice was given to the persons and in the manner and time specified in his application or the superseding agreement with the Department. One of the comments received concerning notification requested clarification that, in the case of a pooled fund, the notification requirement would be satisfied if the notice to interested persons is furnished to the appropriate fiduciary of each of the plans participating in the pooled fund, but not to all participants and beneficiaries of such plans. In the Department's view, the individuals or organizations that will constitute "interested persons" depends on the nature of the exemption being requested. For this reason, the proposed regulation did not attempt to delineate the term "interested persons" for purposes of the notification requirements of § 2570.43. As previously noted, the applicant is required to include, as part of the exemption application, a description of the interested persons to whom the applicant intends to provide notice (§ 2570.34(b)(2)(i)). If the Department finds that either the method of providing notice or the persons to whom the applicant proposes to provide notice is inadequate, the Department will, pursuant to § 2570.43, secure an agreement from the applicant on the appropriate method of providing the notice and/or the scope of the notice to be provided. The Department believes that this approach provides the flexibility necessary to accommodate the varied types of exemption applications, as well as circumstances unique to a particular applicant.7 Accordingly, the Department has decided to adopt § 2570.43 as proposed. However, subparagraph (b)(2) of this section has been modified to insert references to the Code and FERSA and to reflect the current room number of the Division of Exemptions in a footnote to that section. Paragraph (d), of this section has also been modified to clarify that the declaration accompanying the statement to be furnished to the Department regarding the notice to, interested persons must be made under penalty of perjury, as stated in the preamble to the proposed regulation (53 FR 24422, at 24425, June 28,1988). Withdrawal and Reinstatement of Exemption Applications Section 2570.44 of the proposed regulation permitted an applicant to withdraw his application at any time and to reinstate the application later. Reinstatement may be requested without resubmitting any information or materials previously furnished if no more than two years has elapsed from the withdrawal date. The request for reinstatement must be accompanied by any additional information that was outstanding at the time of withdrawal. No comments were received on the proposed section, which is adopted in the final regulation without change. Requests for Reconsideration of Final Denials Under § 2570.45 of the proposed regulation, after the Department has issued a final denial letter on an exemption, it will not reconsider an application covering the same transaction unless the applicant presents significant new facts or arguments in support of the exemption which, for good reason, the applicant could not have submitted for consideration during the Department's initial review of the exemption. An applicant must present the significant new facts or arguments in a request for reconsideration within 180 days after the issuance of the final denial letter. Proposed § 2570.45 also stated that only one request for reconsideration of any finally denied application will be considered by the Department. Although no comments were received on this section of the proposed regulation, the Department has modified this section in the final regulation to clarify that the Department will not limit the number of requests for reconsideration of final denials based solely on the applicant's failure to respond timely to a tentative denial letter or to furnish additional information timely (i.e., within the time frames provided under § 2570.38(b) or 2570.39(e), respectively). The Department has also clarified in the final regulation that the declaration required under § 2570.45(c) must be made under penalty of perjury. This clarification is consistent with the requirement of § 2570.34(b)(5) that every original exemption application must be accompanied by a similar declaration under penalty of perjury. The Department intends that the same type of declaration should accompany both an original exemption application and request for reconsideration of a final denial based on the merits of such an application. Hearings Section 408(a) of ERISA precludes the Department from granting an exemption from the fiduciary self-dealing prohibitions of section 406(b) unless the Department affords an opportunity for a hearing and makes a determination on the record with respect to the three statutory criteria established for granting an exemption.8 Because these provisions specify that an opportunity for a hearing must be given before an exemption from these prohibitions is granted, but not before such an exemption is denied, the Department interprets these provisions to mean that only opponents of such an exemption must be given an opportunity for a hearing. Moreover, the Department has concluded that it must provide a hearing on the record to opponents of such a proposed exemption only where it appears that there are material factual issues relating to the proposed exemption that cannot be fully explored without such a hearing. Indeed, in the Department's experience, such hearings are not useful where the only issues to be decided are matters of law or where material factual issues can be adequately explored by less costly and more expeditious means, such as written submissions. Accordingly, under § 2570.46 of the proposed regulation, the Department requires that persons who may be adversely affected by the grant of an exemption from the fiduciary self-dealing prohibitions offer some evidence of the existence of issues that can be fully examined only at a hearing before it will grant a request for a hearing. Where persuasive evidence of the existence of such issues is offered, however, the Department will grant the requested hearing. Under § 2570.47 of the proposed regulation, the Department may schedule a hearing on its own motion if it determines that a hearing would be useful in exploring issues relevant to the requested exemption. Under the proposed procedures, if the Department decides to conduct a hearing on an exemption under either § 2570.46 or § 2570.47, the applicant must notify interested persons of the hearing in the manner prescribed by the Department. Ordinarily, such notice may be provided by furnishing interested persons with a copy of the notice of hearing published by the Department in the Federal Register within 10 days of its publication. After furnishing notice, the applicant must submit to the Department a declaration under penalty of perjury certifying that notice has been provided in the manner prescribed. Any testimony or other evidence offered at a hearing held under either § 2570.46 or § 2570.47 becomes part of the administrative record to be used by the Department in making its final decision on an exemption application. No comments were received on proposed § 2570.46 and 2570.47, which are adopted without change in the final regulation. Grant of Exemption Section 2570.48 of the proposed regulation provided that if, after considering all of an applicant's submissions, together with any comments received from interested persons and the record of any hearing held in connection with a requested exemption, the Department determines that the exemption should be granted, it will publish a notice in the Federal Register granting the exemption. This proposed section also described the contents of the grant notice. No comments were received on proposed § 2570.48, which is adopted without change in the final regulation. Limits on the Effect of Exemptions Notwithstanding the duty to amend and supplement exemption applications provided under § 2570.37, the Department expressly conditions every exemption on the accuracy and completeness of the facts and representations provided by an applicant in support of the exemption. Therefore, as indicated under § 2570.49 of the proposed regulation, an exemption does not take effect or protect parties in interest from liability unless the material facts and representations contained in the application or in any other materials, documents, or testimony submitted by the applicant in support of the application were true and complete Thus, for example, in the case of a continuing exemption transaction such as a loan or a lease, if any of the material facts described in the application were to change after the exemption is granted, the exemption would cease to apply as of the date of such change even though, pursuant to § 2570.37, the applicant would not be obligated to notify the Department of such change. In the event of any such change, the parties in interest involved in the exemption transaction may apply for a new exemption to protect themselves from liability on or after the date of such change. Such an application should be submitted before such change occurs (see the discussion of prospective, versus retroactive, exemptions under the heading "Copies of Documents," above). No comments were received on proposed § 2570.49, which is adopted without change in the final regulation. Revocation or Modification of Exemptions Section 2570.50 of the proposed regulation described the circumstances under which the Department may revoke or modify a previously granted exemption and the rights afforded to the applicant and to other interested persons in the event such revocation or modification is proposed. This section also provided that ordinarily such revocation or modification will be prospective only. Under this proposed section, one of the circumstances permitting the Department to modify or revoke an exemption was a change in policy which calls into question the continuing validity of the Department's original conclusions regarding the granted exemption. Two of the comments objected to permitting a change in policy as grounds for revoking or modifying a granted exemption. The commentators argued that disturbing transactions already reviewed and approved by the Department would inject an unneeded element of uncertainty into the exemption process. Moreover, concern was expressed that the revocation of an exemption could severely disrupt an applicant's business and impose great financial hardship. A commentator suggested that the final regulation include a prohibition against revocation of an exemption until the affected party in interest is given both written notice of the facts or conduct which may warrant the revocation and an opportunity to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the exemption.9 Proposed § 2570.50 is intended to provide the Department with the flexibility to undertake appropriate action in those cases where, subsequent to the grant of an exemption, potentially abusive practices or changes in the regulatory environment of an industry are identified which would cause the Department to reconsider its policy with respect to whether the exemption transactions continue to satisfy the statutory criteria under section 408(a) of ERISA. With regard to the procedural issues raised by one of the comments, the Department notes that paragraph (b) of proposed § 2570.50 provides for notice to interested persons by publication in the Federal Register, notice to the applicant of the proposed revocation or modification, and an opportunity for the interested persons and the applicant to submit comments on the proposed revocation or modification. After careful consideration of the comments, the Department has decided to adopt § 2570.50 as proposed. However the Department has clarified paragraph (b) to provide that the notice of proposed revocation or modification given to the applicant must be in writing. Public Inspection and Copies Section 2570.51 of the proposed regulation provided that the public may examine and copy any exemption application and all correspondence and documents submitted in regard thereto and may receive photocopies of all or any portion of such administrative record for a specified charge per page. For this reason, the Department cannot honor requests to keep confidential any information submitted regarding an exemption application. Therefore, none of the information submitted in regard to a requested exemption should be material that the applicant or other sender does not wish to disclose to the public. No comments were received on proposed § 2570.51, which is adopted without change in the final regulation. Executive Order 12291 Statement The Department has determined that this regulatory action would not constitute a "major rule" as that term is used in Executive Order 12291 because the action would not result in: an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, government agencies, or geographical regions; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in the domestic or export markets. Regulatory Flexibility Act Statement The Department has determined that this regulation would not have a significant economic impact on small plans or other small entities. As stated previously, this regulation would do little more than describe procedures that reflect practices already in place for filing and processing applications for exemptions from the prohibited transaction provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and the Federal Employee Retirement System Act of 1986. Paperwork Reduction Act This regulation modifies current collection of information requirements. It does so largely by codifying requests for facts and opinions that are routinely addressed to applicants for exemptions under current procedures. Accordingly, the regulation will not increase the paperwork burden for applicants. The regulation has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-511). The final regulation is assigned control number 1210-0060. Authority The final regulation set forth herein is issued pursuant to the authority granted in sections 408(a) (Pub. L. 93-406, 88 Stat. 883, 29 USC 1108(a)) and 505 (Pub. L. 93-406, 88 Stat. 894, 29 USC 1135) of ERISA, under Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978 (43 FR 47713, October 17, 1978), under 5 USC 8477(c)(3), and under Secretary of Labor's Order No. 187 (52 FR 13139, April 21, 1987). List of Subjects in 29 C.F.R. Part 2570 Administrative practice and procedure, Employee benefit plans, Employee Retirement Income Security Act, Federal Employees' Retirement System Act, Party in interest, Pensions, Prohibited transactions. For the reasons set out in the preamble, parts 2570 and 2585 of chapter XXV of title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows: Part 2570-[Amended]
Authority: 29 USC 1108(a), 1135; Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978; 5 USC 8477(c)(3); Secretary of Labor's Order No. 187. Subpart A is also issued under 29 USC 1132(i). Subpart B - Procedures for Filing and Processing Prohibited Transaction Exemption Applications Sec. 2570.30 Scope of rules. 2570.31 Definitions. 2570.32 Persons who may apply for exemptions. 2570.33 Applications the Department will not ordinarily consider. 2570.34 Information to be included in every exemption application. 2570.35 Information to be included in applications for individual exemptions only. 2570.36 Where to file an application. 2570.37 Duty to amend and supplement exemption applications. 2570.38 Tentative denial letters. 2570.39 Opportunities to submit additional information. 2570.40 Conferences. 2570.41 Final denial letters. 2570.42 Notice of proposed exemption. 2570.43 Notification of interested persons by applicant. 2570.44 Withdrawal of exemption applications. 2570.45 Requests for reconsideration. 2570.46 Hearings in opposition to exemptions from restrictions on fiduciary self-dealing. 2570.47 Other hearings. 2570.46 Decision to grant exemptions. 2570.49 Limits on the effect of exemptions. 2570.50 Revocation or modification of exemptions. 2570.51 Public inspection and copies. 2570.52 Effective date. Subpart B - Procedures for Filing and Processing Prohibited Transaction Exemption Applications § 2570.30 Scope of rules.
§ 2570.31 Definitions. For purposes of these procedures, the following definitions apply:
§ 2570.32 Persons who may apply for exemptions.
§ 2570.33 Applications the Department will not ordinarily consider -
§ 2570.34 Information to be included in every exemption application.
§ 2570.35 Information to be included in applications for Individual exemptions only.
§ 2570.36 Where to file an application. The Department's prohibited transaction exemption program is administered by the Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration (PWBA). Any exemption application governed by these procedures should be mailed or otherwise delivered to: Exemption Application, PWBA, Office of Exemption Determinations, Division of Exemptions, US Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20210. § 2570.37 Duty to amend and supplement exemption applications.
§ 2570.38 Tentative denial letters.
§ 2570.39 Opportunities to submit additional information.
§ 2570.40 Conferences.
§ 2570.41 Final denial letters.
§ 2570.42 Notice of proposed exemption. If the Department tentatively decides, based on all the information submitted by an applicant, that the exemption should be granted, it will publish a notice of proposed exemption in the Federal Register. The notice will:
§ 2570.43 Notification of Interested persons by applicant.
You are hereby notified that the United States Department of Labor is considering granting an exemption from the prohibited transaction restrictions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or the Federal Employees' Retirement System Act of 1986. The exemption under consideration is explained in the enclosed Notice of Proposed Exemption. As a person who may be affected by this exemption, you have the right to comment on the proposed exemption by [date].1 [If you may be adversely affected by the grant of the exemption, you also have the right to request a hearing on the exemption by [date].]2 Comments or requests for a hearing should be addressed to: Office of Exemption Determinations, Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, Room ---,3 US Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20210, Attention: Application No. ---,4 The Department will make no final decision on the proposed exemption until it reviews all comments received in response to the enclosed notice. If the Department decides to hold a hearing on the exemption before making its final decision, you will be notified of the time and place of the hearing.
§ 2570.44 Withdrawal of exemption applications.
§ 2570.45 Requests for reconsideration.
§ 2570.46 Hearings in opposition to exemptions from restrictions on fiduciary self-dealing.
2570.47 Other hearings.
§ 2570.48 Decision to grant exemptions.
§ 2570.49 Limits on the effect
of exemptions.
§ 2570.50 Revocation or modification
of exemptions.
§ 2570.51 Public Inspection and
copies.
§ 2570.52 Effective Date. This regulation is effective with respect to all applications for exemptions
filed with the Department under section 408(a) of ERISA,
section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, or 5 USC 8477(c)(3) at any time
on or after September 10, 1990. Applications for exemptions under
section 408(a) of ERISA and/or section 4975 of the Code filed before
September 10, 1990, are governed by ERISA Procedure 75-1.
Applications for exemption under 5 USC 8477(c)(3) filed before
September 10, 1990, but after December 29, 1988 are governed by
part 2585 of chapter XXV of title 29 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, (section 29 C.F.R. part 2585 as revised
July 1, 1990). Applications under 5 USC 8477(c)(3) filed before
December 29, 1988 are governed by ERISA Procedure 75-1. Part 2585 [Removed) 3. The regulations in part 2585 of chapter XXV of title 29 of the Code
of Federal Regulations are removed. Signed at Washington, DC, this 27th day of July, 1990. David G. Ball, Assistant Secretary for Pension and Welfare Benefits U.S. Department of Labor. - Footnotes to Preamble - - Footnotes to Regulation - |
![]() |
![]() |
Home Contact Us Search Help SiteMap Forms Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Service Center Website Policies USA.gov |
FDIC Office of Inspector General |