<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Benefits Notes &#124;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://benefitsnotes.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://benefitsnotes.com</link>
	<description>All you need to know about Employee Benefits and the law from the attorneys at Leonard, Street, and Deinard.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 15:01:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Be Careful if ROBS is Your Business Financing Strategy</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/be-careful-if-robs-is-your-business-financing-strategy/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/be-careful-if-robs-is-your-business-financing-strategy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 15:01:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Angela Bohmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Retirement Plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benefits Notes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fleck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prohibited Transaction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ROBS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rollovers as Business Start-up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=819</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Various promoters have suggested to entrepreneurs that they use the assets in their 401(k) plans or IRAs to finance a new business. These programs are sometimes known by the acronym ROBS, or Rollovers as Business Start-ups. The basic structure involves the entrepreneur’s rollover from a prior employer of the amount in his or her qualified [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/be-careful-if-robs-is-your-business-financing-strategy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DOL (Finally) Issues Model Exchange Notice</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/dol-finally-issues-model-exchange-notice-4/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/dol-finally-issues-model-exchange-notice-4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 21:01:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jewelie Grape</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Care Reform]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=813</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On May 8, 2013, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued long-awaited temporary guidance and a model notice to be provided to employees about upcoming coverage options through the health care exchange, known as the Marketplace, established as a part of the health care reform legislation. This notice was originally supposed to be provided to employees [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/dol-finally-issues-model-exchange-notice-4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Employers – are you updating your HIPAA documents?</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/employers-are-you-updating-your-hipaa-documents/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/employers-are-you-updating-your-hipaa-documents/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 12:48:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jewelie Grape</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cafeteria Plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benefits Notes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIPAA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=799</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Department of Health and Human Services released final Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) privacy and security regulations on January 25, 2013. These regulations impact covered entities, including group health plans, most health care flexible spending accounts, and their business associates. The new rules were effective March 26, 2013, but covered entities and [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/employers-are-you-updating-your-hipaa-documents/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another Business Owner Caught by Withdrawal Liability</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/another-business-owner-caught-by-withdrawal-liability/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/another-business-owner-caught-by-withdrawal-liability/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 13:21:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Angela Bohmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Multi-employer Plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benefits Notes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Central States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Independent Contractor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nagy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Seventh Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[withdrawal liability]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=794</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have blogged before [May 16, 2012, November 21, 2012, April 23, 2012, May 15, 2012, September 5, 2012] about the liability that can be imposed on businesses whose union employees participate in a multiemployer pension plan if the business ceases to participate in that plan. That liability is called withdrawal liability and can be [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/another-business-owner-caught-by-withdrawal-liability/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Self-Funded Employer’s Worst Nightmare</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/a-self-funded-employers-worst-nightmare/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/a-self-funded-employers-worst-nightmare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2013 14:56:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Angela Bohmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ANB Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benefits Notes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Express Oil Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Self Funded Medical Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stop Loss Coverage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stop Loss Insurance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=791</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Employers who sponsor health plans for their employees can purchase insurance contracts to fund those plans. Alternatively, employers can self-fund or self-insure those benefits, agreeing to pay the claims themselves. Many employers who provide self-funded plans also buy stop-loss insurance to cover the risk of exceptionally large claims. However, employers must be careful that their [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/a-self-funded-employers-worst-nightmare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nonresident Employee Avoids New York Taxes on Deferred Compensation Payment</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/nonresident-employee-avoids-new-york-taxes-on-deferred-compensation-payment/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/nonresident-employee-avoids-new-york-taxes-on-deferred-compensation-payment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2013 14:46:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Angela Bohmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Deferred Compensation and 409A]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Executive Compensation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Payroll]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[04/08/2013]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 USC Sec. 114(a)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[409A]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benefits Notes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York State Income Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nonqualified Deferred Compensation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nonresident Taxation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Law 104-95]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TSB-A-13(5)I]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=788</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A taxpayer we will call John worked for a savings bank in New York that was acquired by Washington Mutual Bank. John participated in the New York bank’s supplemental executive retirement plan (SERP) and its deferred compensation plan, both of which were nonqualified deferred compensation plans. When Washington Mutual Bank acquired the New York bank, [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/05/nonresident-employee-avoids-new-york-taxes-on-deferred-compensation-payment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Do Not Delay Getting Your QDRO</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/do-not-delay-getting-your-qdro/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/do-not-delay-getting-your-qdro/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 19:33:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Angela Bohmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Multi-employer Plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retirement Plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benefits Notes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Langston]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[post-death]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[post-retirement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post-Retirement QDRO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qualified domestic relations order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[survivor benefits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twin Cities Carpenters and Joiners Pension Fund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wilson McShane]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=780</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Employers know that benefits under a retirement plan can be split between a participant and a former spouse in the event of a divorce under the terms of a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO). A domestic relations order is qualified if it meets certain technical requirements. A recent decision from the Minnesota Supreme Court highlights [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/do-not-delay-getting-your-qdro/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>EEOC Requires Reasonable Accommodations for Wellness Plans</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/eeoc-requires-reasonable-accommodations-for-wellness-plans/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/eeoc-requires-reasonable-accommodations-for-wellness-plans/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 19:21:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Angela Bohmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[01/13/2013]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Americans with Disabilities Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EEOC letter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reasonable accomodations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=775</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many employers are offering wellness programs to employees in connection with their health plans and are aware of the HIPAA regulations that govern such programs. Although employers design their wellness programs to conform to the HIPAA guidance, they sometimes forget that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) might also affect the wellness program. Employers covered [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/eeoc-requires-reasonable-accommodations-for-wellness-plans/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Plan Sponsor’s Recovery of Participant Damages Award</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/the-u-s-supreme-court-upholds-plan-sponsors-recovery-of-participant-damages-award/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/the-u-s-supreme-court-upholds-plan-sponsors-recovery-of-participant-damages-award/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:40:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Cairns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ERISA and Other Benefits Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiduciary Guidance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Welfare Plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[group health plan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery of medical expense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subrogation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=769</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On April 16, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in U.S. Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-1285_i4dk.pdf finding in favor of U.S. Airways in its quest to recover $66,866 in medical expenses incurred by its employee as a result of a traffic accident. McCutchen was a participant in the U.S. Airways Group Health Plan [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/the-u-s-supreme-court-upholds-plan-sponsors-recovery-of-participant-damages-award/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ninth Circuit Decides  Selection of Retail Mutual Funds Was a Breach of Fiduciary Duty</title>
		<link>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/ninth-circuit-decides-selection-of-retail-mutual-funds-was-a-breach-of-fiduciary-duty/</link>
		<comments>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/ninth-circuit-decides-selection-of-retail-mutual-funds-was-a-breach-of-fiduciary-duty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:57:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Cairns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ERISA and Other Benefits Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiduciary Guidance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retirement Plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[401(k) plan fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[404(c)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ERISA litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiduciary Breach]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://benefitsnotes.com/?p=762</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On March 21, 2013 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Tibble v. Edison International, http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2013/03/21/10-56406.pdf in which the Court ruled that the plan fiduciaries of the Edison 401(k) Savings Plan (the “Plan”) had breached their fiduciary duty by selecting retail mutual funds with 12(b)(1) fees when lower cost institutional funds were [...]<p>This is a post from <a href="http://benefitsnotes.com">Benefits Notes |</a>, a blog with all copyrights reserved by Leonard, Street and Deinard.</p>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://benefitsnotes.com/2013/04/ninth-circuit-decides-selection-of-retail-mutual-funds-was-a-breach-of-fiduciary-duty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
