NYC Bar Association
42 W 44th Street
New York, NY 10036
Seyfarth is proud to serve as a Gold sponsor of the International Employment Lawyer (IEL) Executive Compensation & Benefits Summit, taking place May 27, 2025, in New York City. This prestigious global event brings together leading legal and HR professionals to
Seyfarth Synopsis: Arkansas has become the first state in the nation to enact legislation, effective starting in 2026, prohibiting pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) from owning or operating actual pharmacies within the state. We take a look at what that may mean for employers sponsoring health plans with pharmacy benefits in the state.
PBMs have become a unifying scapegoat in the escalating concern about the cost of prescription drug coverage in the country. So, it becomes important to understand what role they really play. PBMs act as a middle man of sorts for the prescription drug coverage offered by many employer health benefit plans. With the ever-expanding universe of prescription drugs, including the many specialty drugs that are being offered and widely advertised to the public, it is difficult for plan sponsors to be able to directly manage this benefit. PBMs grew up as an answer to the needs for a third party to administer drug coverage under plans. Continue Reading Cutting Out the Middle Man
In this episode, we’re joined by Ameena Majid, Seyfarth’s Impact & Sustainability Partner, to explore the intricacies of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) investing. Ameena explains the core principles of ESG, why it has become a priority for companies, and the different types of ESG investing. We also discuss how corporate ESG goals influence
Seyfarth Synopsis: On January 17, 2025, the U.S. Departments of Treasury, Labor and Health and Human Services (the “Agencies”) released its annual report to Congress assessing compliance with statutory mental health parity requirements under the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (“MHPAEA”). On the same day, a federal lawsuit was filed against the Agencies challenging the recently published final rule governing MHPAEA compliance (the “Final Rule”).
Each year since the passage of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, the Agencies have published a report to Congress detailing widespread noncompliance with the MHPAEA rules governing non-quantitative treatment limitations (“NQTLs”), providing examples of problematic NQTLs, and outlining related corrective actions enforced by the Agencies. This year was no different. In January, the Agencies’ annual report to Congress identified common NQTLs and how to address them, focusing primarily on certain key priority areas such as mental health and substance use disorder benefit exclusions, prior authorization requirements, and network composition issues. For example:Continue Reading Federal Lawsuit and Tri-Agency Report Shake Up Mental Health Parity
Seyfarth Synopsis: The DOL updated its voluntary fiduciary correction program (“VFCP”) which was introduced over 20 years ago to allow plan sponsors to corrected enumerated fiduciary breaches. The amended VFCP now allows for self-correction of the failure to timely remit contributions and loan repayments withheld from participants’ salary to the plan.
The prior VFCP required
Seyfarth Synopsis: Over the years, plan sponsors and administrators have wrestled with the question of what to do with the accounts of participants who left employment years earlier and cannot now be located. Notwithstanding their best efforts, plans continue to maintain accounts of participants who are either missing or unresponsive to plan correspondence (“missing participants”). On January 14, 2025, the DOL issued Field Assistance Bulletin (FAB) 2025-01 that allows sponsors and administrators of ongoing defined contribution (DC) plans to transfer unclaimed small accounts to a state unclaimed property fund of the participant’s last known address provided the fund satisfies certain requirements.
The issue of what to do with the accounts of missing participants is an age-old question. In 2014 the DOL issued FAB 2014-01, stating that an IRA was the preferred destination for unclaimed defined contribution (DC) plan accounts. That same FAB also acknowledged that IRAs may not be available for terminating DC plans, and suggested that in certain circumstances, a state unclaimed property fund or an interest-bearing FDIC-insured bank account might also be appropriate. More recently, the DOL became concerned that IRAs may not be the sole (or even most) appropriate destination for unclaimed plan accounts, as IRAs charge fees that often exceed the investment returns of small accounts, resulting in the account being eaten away by fees. In fact, when plan sponsors started looking to IRAs as the destination of its unclaimed account balances, the sponsors found it challenging to find an IRA provider who would accept all accounts, particularly small accounts, and that the limited choices resulted in front end, back end, and/or annual fees that would quickly exhaust the account balance. From the fiduciary perspective, many plan fiduciaries were reluctant to make such transfers. As time passed, however, more IRA providers became available and fees dropped. But not necessarily to zero.Continue Reading Missing Participants – What to do With Abandoned Accounts
This post has been updated as of March 4, 2025.
Seyfarth Synopsis: On December 17, 2024,
the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee presented
two bills – the Paperwork Burden Reduction Act (HR 3797) and the Employer Reporting Improvement Act (HR 3801) – to President Biden, which he signed into
Seyfarth Synopsis: Since September 2023, there have been at least 25 lawsuits filed claiming the ability to choose between using 401(k) forfeitures to reduce plan expenses or the plan sponsor’s contributions is a fiduciary choice, and that choosing to reduce the plan sponsor’s contributions constitutes a violation of ERISA’s fiduciary duties. In the latest decision
Seyfarth Synopsis: The IRS recently published two notices which describe the tax treatment of amounts paid for condoms and expand the list of preventive care benefits permitted to be provided by a high deductible health plan (HDHP) without payment of a deductible.
Notice 2024-71 – This notice provides that amounts paid for condoms will be