Retirement Plans

Subscribe to Retirement Plans via RSS

In this installment of our Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation Preparing For 2026 series, hosts Constance Brewster and Jeff Banish walk employers through the new rules on mandatory Roth catch-up contributions and the optional “super catch-up contributions,” as we approach 2026. This episode distills what’s changing, who’s affected, updated limits for 2026, and practical steps plan sponsors should take now to prepare for 2026.

On November 24, the Ninth Circuit issued an unpublished memorandum disposition in Dedicato Treatment Center, Inc. v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., affirming dismissal of an out-of-network provider’s state-law claims as preempted by ERISA’s remedial scheme. The panel’s brief decision underscores that the Court’s 2024 decision in Bristol Holdings (discussed here) applies broadly to state-law causes of action arising from pre-service verification-of-benefits and authorization communications, even where a provider also pleads an alternative ERISA benefits claim pursuant to an assignment of benefits from the member. Although not precedential under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3, the disposition is a clear, persuasive affirmation of Bristol’s reach.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced the 2026 cost-of-living adjustments to the dollar limitations for qualified retirement plans and other benefits, and the Social Security Administration announced its own cost-of-living adjustments for 2026. Most of the dollar limits, including the elective deferral contribution limit for 401(k), 403(b), and 457(b) plans; the annual compensation limit under 401(a)(17); and the maximum annual contribution limit under Code Section 415(c) will increase from 2025 limits. The dollar limit for catch-up contributions for participants who attain age 60,61,62, or 63 in 2026 will remain the same.

Last May, we provided a client alert about a recent federal district court case (Spence v. American Airlines, No. 4:23-cv-00552-O, 2025 WL 225127, at *2 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 10, 2025)), in which a plan sponsor and certain plan fiduciaries were found to have breached their ERISA fiduciary duty of loyalty based primarily on conduct related to proxy voting of securities held in certain of the 401(k) plans’ investment funds. At that time, the court left open the question of whether the breach resulted in any damages to the participants.

On September 9, 2025, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued Advisory Opinion 2025-03A addressing the following question: Are awards of restricted stock units (RSUs) that permit post-employment vesting considered a “pension plan” subject to the requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)? For the reasons discussed below, the DOL answered, no, the RSUs are not subject to ERISA.

In our recent client alert, “Texas Federal Court Allows an ERISA Fiduciary Challenge Against Alleged “ESG Investing” Without Any ESG Funds,” we reported that a Texas district court recently upheld Biden-administration Department of Labor (DOL) rules permitting environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations as “tie breakers” in selecting 401(k) plan investments. The district court, following instructions from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, applied a Loper Bright “post-Chevron” analysis to hold that the Biden-era rules were validly issued.

The Internal Revenue Service announced the 2025 cost-of-living adjustments to the dollar limitations for qualified retirement plans and other benefits, and the Social Security Administration announced its own cost-of-living adjustments for 2025. Most of the dollar limits, including the elective deferral contribution limit for 401(k), 403(b) and 457(b) plans, the…

In a blog post dated May 10, 2024, we discussed the Form 5330, an excise tax return used by certain employers and individuals to pay penalty taxes with respect to employee benefit plans, must be filed electronically for taxable years ending on or after December 31, 2023 if the filer is required to file at least 10 returns of any type. As described further in that blog post, this electronic filing requirement had the potential to create issues for sponsors of qualified retirement plans because there was not an Authorized e-file Provider (“AEP”) with the capability of electronically filing Forms 5330. Without relief from the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), employers would not have the option of filing the Forms 5330 by paper even with the lack of AEPs.…