PSNC 2018: Fee Considerations

Fee-levelization and zero revenue sharing are the newest trends for retirement plan fees.

Retirement plan fee litigation has led plan sponsors and providers to rethink service and investment fees for retirement plans and their participants.  

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan benefits news.

Fee-levelization, an approach where administrative fees are divided equally among enrolled plan participants, is no exception to newly trending strategies. A panel at the 2018 PLANSPONSOR National Conference (PSNC) elucidated the gist of fee-levelization, flat fees, zero-revenue sharing, and all other retirement plan fees considered.

Michael Volo, senior partner at Cammack, explained there are two paths to breaking down fee-levelization: per capita and on a basis point fee. Per capita fees, he said, have been stigmatized by plan sponsors in the past, as many believe they are not the fairest way to charge participants. “Fee leveling is simply every participant paying their share. It’s a very transparent approach,” he said. “Even with some plan sponsors, it’s pushing a rock up to hill to convince them.”

Among the fee requirements under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) is ensuring participants pay reasonable fees, a requirement especially notable given the series of fiduciary liability lawsuits that have sprung in past years. To combat litigation, Volo suggested providers inform and alert plan sponsors about fees. “Almost all fiduciary lawsuits have to do with fees,” he said. “With all of our clients, we’ve spent the past two years educating them on fees.”

Scott Everhart, president of Everhart Advisors, connected the largest aspect of fee-levelization to revenue sharing. With investment lineups, he said, institutional classes with zero revenue sharing are favored.

The idea of disclosing fees to participants was reviewed as well. In the past, fee explanation has proven difficult for participants, as its overpowering data can scare employees off, especially those learning the material alone. Instead, Volo recommended plan sponsors, advisers and recordkeepers should implement a Q&A. Utilizing a questions and answers forum, or a FAQ, can consolidate material and ease the learning path for participants.

“What I’ve seen in success is, having a Q&A is important. We try to take the best of the best, so then we have all the resources mitigate questions and then if they come, you have the best resources,” he said.

Another way to educate participants, Everhart said, is to encourage participant meetings and communications with the plan’s providers. This, in turn, can increase participation, knowledge and engagement with the plan. “We want our provider, or our provider’s team, to be out with participants,” he said.

DOL Finalizes Regulations to Extend Small Business Access to Health Plans

However, the Trump administration has already been threatened with a lawsuit over the regulation.

The Department of Labor (DOL) has finalized regulations to expand the opportunity to offer employment-based health insurance to small businesses through Small Business Health Plans, also known as Association Health Plans (AHPs).

According to a DOL announcement, many small business owners cannot afford to offer health insurance to their employees. The percentage of small businesses offering health care coverage has been dropping substantially. For the self-employed, the individual market exchanges do not offer affordable coverage either; premiums more than doubled between 2013 and 2017 with deductibles increasing even more.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

“This reform allows small employers—many of whom are facing much higher premiums and fewer coverage options as a result of Obamacare—a greater ability to join together and gain many of the regulatory advantages enjoyed by large employers,” the announcement says.

Under the DOL’s new rule, AHPs can serve employers in a city, county, state, or a multi-state metropolitan area, or a particular industry nationwide. Sole proprietors as well as their families will be permitted to join such plans. In addition to providing more choice, the new rule makes insurance more affordable for small businesses. Just like plans for large employers, these plans will be customizable to tailor benefit design to small businesses’ needs. These plans will also be able to reduce administrative costs and strengthen negotiating power with providers from larger risk pools and greater economies of scale.

The rule includes several safeguards. Consumer protections and healthcare anti-discrimination protections that apply to large businesses will also apply to AHPs organized under this rule. As it has for large company plans since 1974, the Department’s Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) will monitor these new plans to ensure compliance with the law and protect consumers. Additionally, States will continue to share enforcement authority with the Federal Government.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that millions of people will switch their coverage to more affordable and more flexible AHP plans and save thousands of dollars in premiums. CBO also estimates that 400,000 previously uninsured people will gain coverage under AHPs.

More information about AHPs can be found on the DOL’s website.

A lawsuit coming

While some employer groups have applauded the regulation for helping more employees gain access to health care coverage, other groups have expressed fear that it will increase pricing on Affordable Care Act (ACA) market exchanges by taking a number of consumers out of the pool.

In a blog post, Mercer says, “This regulation opens a large door for associations, small employers and sole proprietors to access competitive health care benefits. Association Health Plans are arrangements where employers band together to purchase health coverage. By banding together, smaller employers can access benefits currently afforded only to large employers, like cost savings, reduced administrative complexity, and less regulatory burden.”

The Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA) says it commends the Trump administration for their commitment to lowering costs and increasing competition in the nation’s health insurance marketplace. “The rule thoughtfully addresses the needs of working owners, maintains rules for existing AHPs to prevent disruption, and seeks to ensure national associations have a clear path forward to operate,” it said in a statement.

However, New York Attorney General Barbara D. Underwood and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey announced they would sue the Trump administration over the regulation. They released the following statement: “Yesterday’s announcement by the Trump Administration to dramatically expand the footprint of Association Health Plans will invite fraud, mismanagement, and deception—and, as we’ve made clear, will do nothing to help ease the real health care challenges facing Americans. We believe the rule, as proposed, is unlawful and would lead to fewer critical consumer health protections. We will sue to safeguard the protections under the Affordable Care Act and ensure that all families and small businesses have access to quality, affordable health care.”

«