Employee Benefits

Subscribe to Employee Benefits via RSS
jan-huber-4MDXq_aqHY4-unsplash

Seyfarth Synopsis: The DOL’s latest MHPAEA guidance gives plan sponsors a practical roadmap for where parity compliance reviews should focus next. Although the DOL has announced limited nonenforcement relief for certain portions of the 2024 Final Rule, the agency made clear that it continues to enforce MHPAEA’s core statutory requirements, including the obligation to prepare and maintain written NQTL comparative analyses. The key takeaway is to review written plan terms and operational practices for warning signs involving treatment exclusions, medical necessity, utilization management, and network adequacy, and to make sure service providers will provide support.

Consistent with the DOL’s enforcement priorities for 2026, earlier this week the Department of Labor (“DOL”) released Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2026-03 and an accompanying web page (“Identifying Potential Problems: If You See the Following in Written Plan Provisions or Plan Operations, Think Twice about Possible MHPAEA Compliance Problems”), which spotlight three key focus areas for enforcement and provide a checklist for identifying warning signs that might indicate potential compliance problems under the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA).

Three Key Focus Areas

The Field Assistance Bulletin explains that the DOL intends to focus its MHPAEA NQTL enforcement on three areas where it sees significant risk of participant harm:

  1. Treatment exclusions for mental health and substance use disorder benefits;
  2. Medical necessity and utilization management processes, including prior authorization, concurrent review, and related claims review standards; and
  3. Network adequacy and provider reimbursement, including standards for admitting MH/SUD providers to networks and methodologies that may contribute to inadequate access.

Employer Takeaway: According to the guidance, these are the places the DOL is most likely to look first. Treat the DOL’s three focus areas as the starting point for your next MHPAEA review.

Continue Reading DOL Hands Employers a Mental Health Parity Roadmap
ryan-stefan-9jDaQIeTXkc-unsplash

Seyfarth Synopsis: On August 11, 2026, the Internal Revenue Service issued proposed regulations addressing nondiscrimination rules for dependent care assistance programs (“DCAPs”) under Section 129 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “IRC”). More than 45 years after DCAPs were enacted under IRC § 129, these proposed regulations provide long-awaited guidance on DCAP nondiscrimination testing and also address employer contributions and nondiscrimination rules for Trump Accounts. For additional information on Trump Accounts, see our blogs here and here.

Background:

A DCAP allows employees to pay eligible dependent-care expenses with pre-tax dollars. Employers may also contribute to an employee’s DCAP. For 2026, the maximum amount that may be excluded from an employee’s gross income is $7,500, or $3,750 for a married individual filing separately.

Eligible expenses generally include care for:

  • A child under age 13; or
  • A spouse or dependent who lives with the employee and is physically or mentally incapable of self-care

The proposed regulations confirm and elaborate on the four statutory nondiscrimination tests applicable to DCAPs:

  • Contributions and benefits test
  • Eligibility test
  • Owner concentration test
  • Average benefits test

For the first time, each test receives detailed regulatory guidance.

Continue Reading Worth the Wait: After 45 Years, Dependent Care Assistance Programs Finally Get Regulations
anupam-mahapatra-Vz0RbclzG_w-unsplash

Seyfarth Synopsis: In newly issued ACA Implementation FAQs (Part 74), the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Treasury provide welcome guidance for employers sponsoring health-contingent wellness programs. Most notably, the agencies announced temporary enforcement relief regarding the retroactive application of wellness program rewards when a participant satisfies a reasonable alternative…

money-gb338b7221_1920

Seyfarth Synopsis: Section 103 of the SECURE Act 2.0 replaces the Saver’s Credit with a new matching contribution from the federal government. Since the enactment of SECURE 2.0, there have been a number of questions about the implementation of this new matching contribution, and how it will operate. In IRS Notice 2026-48 (“Notice”), the Treasury Department and IRS announced that they intend to propose regulations and other guidance regarding the Saver’s Match program. The Notice does not establish proposed or final regulations. Rather, it outlines the government’s current views on how it expects the Saver’s Match program to work and previews issues that Treasury and the IRS anticipate addressing in future guidance.

What is the Saver’s Match?

Beginning in 2027, the Saver’s Match will replace the federal Saver’s Credit. By way of background, the Saver’s Credit is an income tax credit of up to $1,000 ($2,000 if married filing jointly) that reduces a taxpayer’s federal income tax liability.   

Instead of providing a tax credit, the Saver’s Match is a contribution to an employer’s qualified retirement plan or an IRA from the federal government of up to 50% of what the taxpayer contributes to the retirement plan or IRA, capped at a match of up to $1,000. The Saver’s Match rate is based on an individual’s tax filing status and modified adjusted gross income. For married individuals filing jointly, the match applies to each spouse. Certain individuals, such as those that are under age 18, are not eligible. After SECURE 2.0 was enacted, a number of open questions arose with respect to the Saver’s Match, primarily administrative questions and concerns. For example:

  • Are employer-sponsored retirement plans required to accept these contributions?
  • How will taxpayers “apply” for the Saver’s Match contribution?
  • How will these Saver’s Match contributions be transmitted from Treasury to an employer-sponsored retirement plan?
  • What do employer’s do with these contributions once they are in the plan?  Do they have to be separately tracked?
  • What withdrawal, distribution and reporting requirements apply to Saver’s Match contributions?
  • Will recordkeeper/TPA platforms support these contributions?
  • What if errors arise in the calculation and/or transmittal of the Saver’s Match? How are these issues corrected?

The Notice directly addresses several of the questions outlined above, while leaving room for additional guidance and regulations.

Continue Reading New Saver’s Match, New Plan Sponsor Decisions
micheile-henderson-SoT4-mZhyhE-unsplash

Seyfarth Synopsis: The IRS has issued further guidance on Trump Accounts addressing employer contributions and eligible investments in which Trump Account funds may be invested.

We discuss the new guidance in our Legal Update here. As discussed in our prior blog posts, including “Trump Accounts: The New Kid on the IRA Block” and “No ERISA…

sasun-bughdaryan-eE4uRsnNCsI-unsplash

Seyfarth Synopsis: The Department of Labor (DOL) recently issued Technical Release 2026-02, which clarifies that neither Trump Accounts nor employer contributions to Trump Accounts are considered “employee pension benefit plans” under Section 3(2) of ERISA. For additional information about Trump Accounts, please see our prior to blog posts here and here.

What We Already Knew about Employer and Employee Contributions to Trump Accounts

The One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act and related Treasury guidance previously provided the following parameters for employer and employee contributions to Trump Accounts:

  • Employers may contribute up to $2,500 to Trump Accounts of young employees or children of employees under an Internal Revenue Code Section 128 program (“Section 128 Program”). These contributions are not considered taxable income to the employees or the Trump Account beneficiaries.
  • The $2,500 limit applies on a per employee basis, meaning that if an employee has multiple children with Trump Accounts, the employer’s aggregate contributions to those children’s Trump Accounts may not exceed $2,500.
  • Employers can facilitate pre-tax employee contributions to Trump Accounts for the employee’s dependents (but not the employee) through a Section 125 cafeteria plan.  However, these employee contributions are technically still considered “employer” contributions under a Section 128 Program and would therefore be subject to the same $2,500 limit described above.
  • All Section 128 Program contributions must be made pursuant to a written plan document and the contributions must comply with applicable nondiscrimination testing rules (which are expected to look similar to the nondiscrimination testing rules applicable to Dependent Care Spending Accounts).
Continue Reading No ERISA Strings Attached: The DOL Weighs in on Employer and Employee Contributions to Trump Accounts
thanhy-nguyen-DCg103FwjCg-unsplash

On February 25, 2026, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued proposed regulations implementing Section 338 of SECURE 2.0, which generally requires defined contribution plan administrators to furnish at least one benefit statement on paper every calendar year and defined benefit plan administrators to furnish at least one pension benefit statement on paper every three calendar…

Forking forest path
Jens Lelie, Unsplash

Seyfarth Synopsis: Two unpublished decisions involving the same change in control severance plan went in opposite directions on the standard of review. In 2026, the Fifth Circuit applied abuse of discretion based on plan language delegating interpretive authority to the administrator. In 2025, the Tenth Circuit applied de novo review to similar facts involving…

money-gb338b7221_1920

Seyfarth Synopsis: Since Trump Accounts made their debut as the “New Kid on the IRA Block” in December 2025, Treasury and the IRS have released proposed regulations that add important—but not always simplifying—details to the program. 

The proposed regulations, released on March 9, focus heavily on pilot contribution eligibility and enrollment, adding new…

towfiqu-barbhuiya-Cv1IZqKJQzU-unsplash

Since 2019, Congress has enacted three major pieces of legislation impacting retirement plans, significantly changing the retirement landscape. The legislation contained a number of amendments to the Internal Revenue Code and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, as amended, that impact employer-sponsored retirement plans (e.g., 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, defined benefit plans, and even Puerto…