John P. Carbone
has joined Fred Alger Management as senior vice president, institutional sales and
service. He will concentrate on growing sales and managing ongoing
institutional relationships. Along with the existing institutional team, he will
be responsible for fostering new relationships and increasing market presence
in the institutional, consultant, and certain retirement and bank trust
markets. Carbone will report to Jim Tambone, executive vice president, chief
distribution officer.
Carbone, who has 20 years of experience, was most recently
at BNY Mellon Investment Management, where he grew revenue through direct sales
to corporate retirement plan sponsors on the East Coast. Prior to BNY Mellon, Carbone
held senior institutional sales roles at The Hartford and Mellon Financial. Carbone
coordinated benefit administration delivery and client servicing at Hewitt
Associates. He holds a bachelor’s degree in finance from Providence College.
Jessica Portis joined
Mercer Investments as a senior
consultant to support Mercer’s work in the endowment, foundation and non-profit
health care sectors.
Portis will report to Kim Wood, senior partner and not-for-profit
segment leader. She takes on the new role effective September 8, and will be
located in Mercer’s St. Louis office.
Previously, Portis was a senior consultant and business
leader at Summit Strategies. She has extensive experience in investment
consulting, Mercer says, including expertise in servicing public pension,
corporate defined benefit and defined contribution, endowment, foundation and
not-for-profit health care clients.
When
a defined contribution (DC) retirement plan is awarded damages or receives a
settlement from a lawsuit, it is incumbent on the plan administrator to figure
out how to award the funds to participants.
Initially,
the funds are placed into a holding account, says Daniel Johnson, head of the
employee benefits and compensation practice at Moore & Van Allen in
Charlotte, North Carolina. Then, the first distribution of the settlement
goes to pay attorney fees, adds Mike Kasecamp, retirement plan consultant at
CBIZ Retirement Plan Services in Columbia, Maryland. Their fees are typically
25% to 30% of the settlement. “It is unfortunate that with many of these
settlements, the participants receive such small funds, while the attorneys can
get millions,” he says.
Next, the administrator must figure out how to distribute the funds to
participants, relying on the detailed files of their recordkeepers to help them
determine how to allocate the funds, Johnson says. Sponsors typically divide
the settlement by each participant’s balance at the time of receipt to figure
out a percentage to pay them, Kasecamp adds.
If
the settlement was determined in a relatively short period of time, it could be
easy for the administrator to allocate the funds, Johnson says. However, in
most cases, lawsuits carry on for several years, and participants may have left
a plan, which makes it challenging for the administrator to locate them, and
that can delay payment, Johnson says. “Plans don’t stay static. People move
their money around, and some people may have paid out or have left the
company.”
NEXT: No guidance about
settlement payments
It
is important for sponsors to be very meticulous about how they allocate the
settlement moneys, as, “unfortunately, current regulations do not give specific
instructions, and the process for allocation to participants may not be the
same for every single plan receiving a settlement,” says Rick Skelly, client
executive at Barney & Barney’s retirement services division in San Diego.
“When the plan receives the actual settlement check, it doesn’t come with
specific allocation instructions to the participants. The plan sponsor must
determine the allocation themselves.”
However,
some settlement agreements “include a formula for allocating the funds to
participants,” says Marcia Wagner, principle with Wagner Law Group in Boston.
As
to how participants receive the funds, for those who are currently still in the
plan, it is placed into their accounts, Johnson says. For those who have left
the plan, “it will be a trailing distribution.”
Some
plan sponsors may decide to allocate the funds only to those who are currently
in the plan, Skelly says. However, if it is not “administratively feasible” to
allocate the funds to the participants, “the payment may, to the extent
permitted by the retirement plan, be used to pay reasonable administrative
expenses associated with maintaining the retirement plan,” he explains. “The
money would then be deposited into the forfeiture account in this instance.”
In
addition, if the lawsuit has dragged on for a long period of time and many of
the participants have left the plan and are unreachable, this could also prompt
the sponsor to allocate a settlement to the plan’s administrative expenses,
rather than to participants, Skelly says.
NEXT: How settlement payments appear on statements
When
the settlement payments are issued to participants, because they typically are
so small, they are simply added to the participant’s earnings on their account
statement, Johnson says. “Most of the time, these settlements end up being
pennies to a few dollars” per participant, Kasecamp agrees.
However,
“If it is a big number and has gotten a lot of press, the sponsor will probably
ask the recordkeeper to represent the figure as a line item,” Johnson says.
While
most retirement plan accounts are daily valued, and issue statements to
participants each quarter, a few plans value participant accounts less
frequently, Kasecamp says. “These are balance-forward accounts, and in these
cases, these plans would hold the funds until the [next valuation period],” he
says.
If
the settlement is awarded to a defined benefit plan, “damages and settlement
proceeds would be comingled with the plan’s other assets, and no participant
would have a claim against any specific portion of the assets,” Wagner says.
“Plan benefits under these plans are generally determined under a formula based
on a participant’s compensation and length of service.”
As
to when taxes are paid on settlements, because DC plans are tax-exempt, the
settlements are not taxed, Wagner says. Participants pay taxes when the funds
are distributed.
NEXT: Other considerations
As
to other considerations sponsors must keep in mind when handling settlements,
Johnson says that “a lot of times, these settlements involve the stock of the
sponsoring employer. As a party in interest, it is a prohibitive transaction
for the employer to receive such settlement money. Therefore, the employer has
to go through a prohibitive transaction class exemption to make sure the
settlement is exempt.”
And
just like any other fiduciary action, it is important that the sponsor “make
sure that the funds are allocated to the correct participants and document how
they came up with the figure,” Kasecamp says. “The best way to handle any
fiduciary best practice is to ensure it is a prudent process and that is
documented.”
In
addition, it is important for the plan sponsor to determine whether accepting a
settlement is a better option than pursuing a lawsuit, Wagner says. “Prior to
opting for a settlement, [the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)]
requires a plan fiduciary to conduct a prudent evaluation of whether the
settlement is reasonable and the settlement proceeds are at least as valuable
as the likely recovery from pursuing all aspects of the claim, including both
securities fraud and ERISA causes of action,” she says.
“The plan fiduciary
should consider whether the receipt of the settlement proceeds outweighs the
possibility of receiving a larger recovery by not participating in the
settlement and pursuing the ERISA claims,” according to Wagner.