The words "revenue sharing"—foul language to some 401(k) participant advocates—did not make their way into the Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in Tibble v. Edison.
But that doesn't mean the payment schemes arranged between sponsors, investment managers, third-party plan administrators, and record keepers won't be affected by the decision.
That's because when the Supreme Court speaks, people listen, especially on rulings affecting the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, says Nancy Ross, an ERISA specialist and partner at Mayer Brown.
Complete your profile to continue reading and get FREE access to BenefitsPRO, part of your ALM digital membership.
Your access to unlimited BenefitsPRO content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Critical BenefitsPRO information including cutting edge post-reform success strategies, access to educational webcasts and videos, resources from industry leaders, and informative Newsletters.
- Exclusive discounts on ALM, BenefitsPRO magazine and BenefitsPRO.com events
- Access to other award-winning ALM websites including ThinkAdvisor.com and Law.com
Already have an account? Sign In
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
