Photo of Stephanie O. Zorn

Stephanie O. Zorn is a principal in the St. Louis, Missouri, office of Jackson Lewis P.C.

Stephanie has over twenty years of experience representing management in employee benefits and employment matters, both as in-house counsel and in private practice.

Stephanie is co-lead of the firm’s Transactional Services group and spends a substantial amount of her practice assisting clients with the employment and employee benefits matters implicated in mergers and acquisitions, with a special focus on clients in the private equity, technology, consumer goods, manufacturing and healthcare sectors. Stephanie leads due diligence review, the drafting and negotiation of definitive deal documents, insurer and co-investor interface and closing and post-closing business integrations.

Stephanie’s employee benefits practice includes assisting clients with all aspects of a broad range of plans including retirement plans, health and welfare plans, nonqualified plans, executive compensation plans, severance plans and voluntary early retirement plans. Stephanie also defends plans and plan administrators in disability, group health plan and life insurance claim litigation including ERISA section 502(a)(1)(B) and (a)(3) claims. Stephanie’s practice also includes counseling clients on Internal Revenue Code, ERISA, COBRA, ACA, HIPAA and fiduciary compliance including investment selection, service provider reviews and plan committee issues.

Stephanie’s employment practice consists of counseling employers in connection with discrimination, harassment, disability accommodations, family and medical leave and wage and hour matters. Stephanie also assists clients with reductions in force and reorganizations, noncompete and confidentiality agreements, retention agreements, service provider classification, outsourcing and international labor and employment matters.

Stephanie is a frequent speaker on employee benefits and employment law issues.

For the second time in Amgen Inc. v. Harris, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit because of its failure to apply the proper pleading standard for claims alleging breach of the duty of prudence against fiduciaries who manage employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs). The Supreme Court’s opinion sets forth a specific, stringent pleading

While taxpayers were completing their holiday shopping and preparing to spend time with their families, Congress and the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) were busy changing laws governing employee benefit plans and issuing new guidance under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”). The results of that year-end governmental activity include the following:

Protecting Americans

Background 

Effective 2018, Section 4980I of the IRC — the so-called “Cadillac Tax,” which was added to the IRC by the ACA — will impose a 40% nondeductible excise tax on the aggregate cost of applicable employer-sponsored health coverage that exceeds an annually-adjusted statutory dollar limit. For 2018, the dollar limits are $10,200 for self-only

First effective in 2015, the federal Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act created Internal Revenue Code section 529A qualified ABLE programs, which provide a means of tax-favored savings for disabled individuals.

Section 529A qualified ABLE programs are modeled on Section 529 qualified tuition programs and must be implemented by individual states. States that have

The Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) added section 4980I to the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”). Code section 4980I applies to tax years after December 31, 2017, and provides a tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage – if the aggregate cost of employer-sponsored coverage (referred to as “applicable coverage”) provided to an employee exceeds a statutory

bio image

On June 27, 2014, the IRS released Information Letter 2014-0012, which contains guidance for employees who have had the value of same-sex spousal coverage under employer health plans — which until recently was required to be included in gross income — reported on their Forms W-2.

BACKGROUND

Historically, the employer cost of opposite-sex

On July 14, 2014, the EEOC issued new Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination and Related Issues.  The immediately-effective Guidance sets forth the EEOC’s policies with regard to its enforcement of pregnancy-based employment discrimination prohibitions under Title VII — as clarified by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 — and other federal laws.

With regard