Photo of Keith A. Dropkin

Keith Dropkin is a principal in the White Plains, New York, office of Jackson Lewis P.C.

Keith counsels clients regarding various benefit issues including fiduciary duty obligations, corrections under the DOL and IRS compliance programs, the drafting and design of pension and welfare benefit plans, payroll taxes and those issues arising in mergers and acquisitions. He has represented clients ranging from self-employed individuals to Fortune Top 50 companies. Keith speaks and writes regularly about employee benefits and has been a contributing author for the treatise Employee Benefits Law, published by the Bureau of National Affairs.

What could be in the next stimulus bill in response to the COVID-19 pandemic? Congress reportedly is working on a bill (dubbed “Stimulus 3.5”) that includes additional funding for the Paycheck Protection Program created by the CARES Act.  Will the new stimulus bill address long-awaited reforms to the multiemployer pension plan system?

The imminent

Contributing employers to multiemployer pension plans (“MEPPs”) are commonly surprised that their obligations to such a plan can extend well beyond the contributions required under a collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”) negotiated with a union.  The most significant extra-contractual obligation is withdrawal liability, a statutory exit fee imposed on employers that leave a plan that has

The Internal Revenue Service recently announced its cost-of-living adjustments applicable to dollar limitations for retirement plans and Social Security generally effective for Tax Year 2019 (see IRS Notice 2018-63). Most notably, the limitation on annual salary deferrals into a 401(k) plan will increase from $18,500 to $19,000. The dollar limits are as follows:

 

Both buyers and sellers in asset sale transactions should be cognizant of the ongoing erosion of the common law rule that the purchaser is not responsible for the seller’s liabilities absent a contractual assumption of such liabilities, as evidenced by a recent Ninth Circuit case finding that the theory of successor liability may be used