Law Prof: Cash Balance Amendments 'Constitutionally
Unsound'
November 11, 2003 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - In an opinion
prepared for a retirement industry trade group, a University
of Chicago law professor asserts that legislative amendments
blocking the government cash balance plan rules are
"substantively and constitutionally unsound."
>According to a news release from the American
Benefits Council, the opinion from Richard Epstein argues
that these amendments – as well as the underlying
Cooper v. IBM
federal district court case (See
Murphy’s Law: IBM
Loses Cash Balance Ruling
) – threaten the “separation of powers” provisions of
the Constitution because they “prevent the President from
faithfully executing the laws and manipulates the appellate
process to deny the judiciary access to the views of the
Treasury Department.”
>A congressional conference committee is expected to
produce a final Treasury/Transportation bill soon. The cash
balance pension plan amendments to that bill – proposed by
Representative Bernard Sanders (I-Vermont) and Senator Tom
Harkin (D-Iowa) – would ban the Treasury Department from
finalizing the proposed regulations on cash balance plans
issued late last year (See
Senate OKs Harkin Cash
Balance Amendment
). The amendments would also hinder a Treasury Department
challenge to the IBM ruling, which claimed that cash
balance plans were age discriminatory.
October 23, 2002 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - Congress may
have laid out general reform measures to deal with the
corporate world's financial scandals, but it is up to the US
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to fill in the
details.
That’s why SEC officials have scheduled two meetings for
October 30 and October 31 to further consider proposals
mandated by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 passed as part
of a sweeping corporate accounting reform, according to a
Dow Jones news report.
In the October 30 session, the SEC will consider
proposing rules for the use of pro forma financial
information in company earnings reports. It will also
consider a rule to require companies to discuss off-balance
sheet arrangements in their Management’s Discussion and
Analysis section in annual and quarterly reports.
Under the new rules, companies may be required to
provide a table of contractual obligations due in the short
and long run, and either a table or text disclosure of
total contingent liabilities and commitments in the short
and long-term, the Dow Jones story reported.
Also scheduled for October 30, the SEC will look into
rules that would prohibit a company’s directors and
executives from purchasing, selling, or otherwise
transferring any equity securities of the company during a
pension plan blackout period in which line employees are
also prohibited from making equity transactions in company
stock, Dow Jones said.
This rule would also require companies to provide
advanced notice of pension plan blackout periods.
New Attorney Standards
The next day, the SEC said it would consider rules
establishing standards of professional conduct for
attorneys who represent companies before the
commission.
These standards would include a rule requiring an
attorney to report evidence of a material violation of
securities laws or breach of fiduciary duty by the company
or its officers to the chief legal counsel or the chief
executive officer of the company, the SEC said.
If these executives don’t respond appropriately, the
attorney may be required to report the evidence to the
audit committee, another committee of independent directors
or the full board of directors, Dow Jones said.
Finally, the SEC will look into changing the definition
of terms used in the definition of dealer for banks under
certain securities laws. These proposals relate to the
implementation of the specific exceptions for banks from
the definitions of “broker” and “dealer” that were amended
by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the SEC said.
According to the Dow Jones story, those proposals would
require companies to designate a financial expert on their
corporate boards, adopt internal controls, and disclose
whether they have a code of ethics. Another proposed rule
would bar corporate executives from coercing, manipulating,
or misleading the firm’s auditor.