gavel on top of paper labeled Fiduciary Duty (Photo: Shutterstock)

The U.S. Supreme Court, in its Hughes v. Northwestern University ruling, underscored the need for plan sponsors to err on the side of more rather than less when considering the scope of their fiduciary responsibilities. While the case focused on high-cost investment options, it's conceivable that the ruling could eventually expose plan sponsors to fiduciary risk for decisions that produce unnecessarily high levels of cash-out leakage for terminated participants, a potential risk that could be avoided if plan sponsors were to proactively adopt asset portability solutions, such as auto portability.

Continue Reading for Free

Register and gain access to:

  • Breaking benefits news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
  • Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
  • Critical converage of the property casualty insurance and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, PropertyCasualty360 and ThinkAdvisor
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 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.