Notice of Proposed Amendment to Prohibited Transaction Exemption 80-26 (PTE 80-26) For Certain Interest Free Loans to Employee Benefit Plans, 31584-31590 [2013-12362]
Download as PDF
31584
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security
Administration
[Application Number D–11716]
RIN 1210–ZA21
Notice of Proposed Amendment to
Prohibited Transaction Exemption 80–
26 (PTE 80–26) For Certain Interest
Free Loans to Employee Benefit Plans
Employee Benefits Security
Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Amendment
to PTE 80–26.
AGENCY:
This document contains a
notice of pendency before the
Department of Labor (the Department) of
a proposed amendment to PTE 80–26.
PTE 80–26 is a class exemption that
permits parties in interest with respect
to employee benefit plans to make
certain interest free loans and
extensions of credit to such plans,
provided the conditions of the
exemption are met. The proposed
amendment, if adopted, would give
retroactive and temporary exemptive
relief for certain guarantees of the
payment of debits to plan investment
accounts (including IRAs) by parties in
interest to such plans as well as certain
loans and loan repayments made
pursuant to such guarantees. The
proposed amendment would affect
employee benefit plans described in
section 3(3) of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974, as
amended (ERISA or the Act), and plans
described in section 4975(e)(1) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended (the Code), the participants
and beneficiaries of such plans, and
parties in interest with respect to those
plans engaging in the described
transactions.
DATES: If adopted, the proposed
amendment will be effective from
January 1, 1975, until the date that is six
months after the date on which an
adopted amendment is published in the
Federal Register. Written comments and
requests for a public hearing should be
received by the Department on or before
July 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: All written comments and
requests for a public hearing concerning
the proposed amendment should be sent
to the Office of Exemption
Determinations, Employee Benefits
Security Administration, Room N–5700,
U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20210, Attention: PTE 80–26
Amendment. Interested persons are also
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
21:14 May 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
invited to submit comments and hearing
requests to EBSA, by the end of the
scheduled comment period, via email
to: moffitt.betty@dol.gov or by using the
Federal eRulemaking portal at https://
regulations.gov, Docket ID: EBSA–2012–
0030 (following the instructions for the
submission of comments found on this
Web site). The comments received will
be available for public inspection in the
Public Disclosure Room of the
Employee Benefits Security
Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, Room N–1513, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210.
Comments and hearing requests will
also be available online at
www.regulations.gov and www.dol.gov/
ebsa, at no charge.
Warning: All comments will be made
available to the public. Do not include
any personally identifiable information
(such as name, address, or other contact
information) or confidential business
information that you do not want
publicly disclosed. All comments may
be posted on the Internet and can be
retrieved by most Internet search
engines.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chris Motta, Office of Exemption
Determinations, Employee Benefits
Security Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, (202) 693–8540
(this is not a toll-free number).
Executive Order 12866 and 13563
Statement
Under Executive Orders 12866 and
13563, the Department must determine
whether a regulatory action is
‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to
the requirements of the Executive Order
and subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing and
streamlining rules, and of promoting
flexibility. It also requires federal
agencies to develop a plan under which
the agencies will periodically review
their existing significant regulations to
make the agencies’ regulatory programs
more effective or less burdensome in
achieving their regulatory objectives.
Under Executive Order 12866,
‘‘significant’’ regulatory actions are
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
subject to the requirements of the
Executive Order and review by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866, defines a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as an action that is likely to
result in a rule (1) having an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more, or adversely and materially
affecting a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local or tribal governments or
communities (also referred to as
‘‘economically significant’’); (2) creating
serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfering with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3)
materially altering the budgetary
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4)
raising novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of the Executive
Order, it has been determined that this
action is not ‘‘significant’’ within the
meaning of section 3(f) of the Executive
Order and therefore is not subject to
review by OMB.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is
hereby given of the pendency before the
Department of a proposed amendment
to PTE 80–26.1 PTE 80–26 provides an
exemption from the restrictions of
section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section
406(b)(2) of ERISA and from the taxes
imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of
the Code, by reason of section
4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code.
The proposed amendment was
requested by the Securities Industry and
Financial Markets Association (SIFMA)
pursuant to section 408(a) of ERISA and
section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, and in
accordance with the procedures set
forth in 29 CFR Part 2570, Subpart B (76
FR 66637, October 27, 2011).2 SIFMA
requests that the relief provided by this
proposed amendment to PTE 80–26
include relief from section 406(b)(1) of
ERISA and section 4975(c)(1)(E) of the
Code.3 In addition to proposing certain
relief requested by SIFMA, the
1 45 FR 28545 (April 29, 1980), as corrected at 45
FR 35040 (May 23, 1980) and amended at: 65 FR
17540 (April 3, 2000); 67 FR 9483 (March 1, 2002);
67 FR 9485 (March 1, 2002); and 71 FR 17917 (April
7, 2006).
2 Section 102 of the Reorganization Plan No. 4 of
1978 (5 U.S.C. App. 1 [1996]) generally transferred
the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to
issue administrative exemptions under section 4975
of the Code to the Secretary of Labor.
3 Hereinafter, references to specific provisions of
ERISA should be read as referring also to the
corresponding provisions of section 4975 of the
Code.
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Notices
Department is proposing on its own
motion another amendment to PTE 80–
26.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
A. General Background
The prohibited transaction provisions
of the Act generally prohibit
transactions between a plan and a party
in interest (including a fiduciary) with
respect to such plan. Specifically,
section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) of the Act
provides that a fiduciary with respect to
a plan shall not cause the plan to engage
in a transaction, if he knows or should
know that such transaction constitutes a
direct or indirect—
(B) lending of money or other
extension of credit between the plan
and a party in interest; and
(D) transfer to, or use by or for the
benefit of, a party in interest, of any
assets of the plan.
Section 4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the
Code contain parallel provisions with
respect to plans described in section
4975(e)(1) of the Code.
Accordingly, unless a statutory or
administrative exemption is applicable,
loans, including interest free loans,
extensions of credit, and repayment of
such loans, between a plan and a party
in interest, are prohibited.
In addition, section 406(b)(1) and
(b)(2) of the Act prohibits a fiduciary
with respect to a plan from dealing with
the assets of the plan in his own interest
or for his own account, and from acting
in his individual capacity or any other
capacity in any transaction involving
the plan on behalf of a party (or
representing a party) whose interests are
adverse to the interests of the plan or
the interests of its participants or
beneficiaries. Section 4975(c)(1)(E) of
the Code contains a parallel provision to
section 406(b)(1) of the Act. Section
4975 of the Code does not contain a
parallel provision with respect to
section 406(b)(2) of the Act.
Prohibited transactions that involve
plans described in section 4975(e)(1) of
the Code, including individual
retirement accounts (IRAs), are
generally subject to taxation under
section 4975 of the Code. Additionally,
section 408(e)(2) of the Code provides
that if, during any taxable year of the
individual for whose benefit any IRA is
established, that individual or his or her
beneficiary (hereinafter, an IRA Owner)
engages in any transaction prohibited by
section 4975 with respect to such
account, such account ceases to be an
IRA as of the first day of such taxable
year.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
21:14 May 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
B. Description of Class Exemption
The general exemption in PTE 80–
26,4 as amended effective December 15,
2004, permits the lending of money or
other extension of credit from a party in
interest or disqualified person to an
employee benefit plan, and the
repayment of such loan or other
extension of credit in accordance with
its terms or other written modifications
thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged
to the plan, and no discount for
payment in cash is relinquished by the
plan, in connection with the loan or
extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or
extension of credit are used only—
(1) for the payment of ordinary
operating expenses of the plan,
including the payment of benefits in
accordance with the terms of the plan
and periodic premiums under an
insurance or annuity contract, or
(2) for a purpose incidental to the
ordinary operation of the plan;
(c) The loan or extension of credit is
unsecured;
(d) The loan or extension of credit is
not directly or indirectly made by an
employee benefit plan;
(e) The loan is not described in
section 408(b)(3) of ERISA and the
regulations promulgated thereunder (29
CFR 2550.408b–3) or section 4975(d)(3)
of the Code and the regulations
promulgated thereunder (26 CFR
54.4975–7(b)); and
(f)(1) Any loan described in section
IV(b)(1) that is entered into on or after
April 7, 2006 and that has a term of 60
days or longer must be made pursuant
to a written loan agreement that
contains all of the material terms of
such loan;
(2) Any loan described in (b)(2) of this
paragraph that is entered into for a term
of 60 days or longer must be made
pursuant to a written loan agreement
that contains all of the material terms of
such loan.
For transactions that meet these
conditions, the restrictions of ERISA
section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and ERISA
section 406(b)(2), and the taxes imposed
by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code,
by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B) and
(D) of the Code, do not apply.
The most recent amendment to PTE
80–26 was finalized on April 7, 2006,
but was generally effective December
15, 2004. The purpose of the
amendment was to eliminate a
requirement of the exemption that the
4 The general exemption is set forth in section IV
of PTE 80–26. Sections I–III of the exemption
provided relief for limited time periods, all of
which have expired.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
31585
proceeds of certain loans or extensions
of credit be used only for a period of no
more than three business days.5
Additionally, as part of the amendment,
the Department added conditions (e)
and (f), above. The effective date of
those conditions relates to the date of
the publication of the final amendment
as opposed to the effective date of the
proposed amendment.
On March 1, 2002, the Department
adopted an amendment affecting several
class exemptions, including PTE 80–
26.6 The amendment defines the terms
‘‘employee benefit plan’’ and ‘‘plan’’ for
purposes of the affected class
exemptions as ‘‘an employee benefit
plan described in ERISA section 3(3)
and/or a plan described in section
4975(e)(1) of the Code.’’ Accordingly,
the Department clarified that PTE 80–26
provided relief for transactions
involving IRAs.
C. Background on This Proposed
Amendment to PTE 80–26
On October 27, 2009, the Department
issued Advisory Opinion 2009–03A,
which states that the grant by an IRA
Owner to a broker of a security interest
in the IRA Owner’s non-IRA accounts
with the broker, in order to cover
indebtedness of, or arising from, the
IRA, would be an impermissible
‘‘extension of credit’’ under section
4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code. Thereafter, on
October 20, 2011, the Department issued
Advisory Opinion 2011–09A, which
states that an IRA Owner’s agreement to
indemnify the broker for losses suffered
by the IRA account with the broker
(hereinafter, an indemnification
agreement) 7 is not within the scope of
relief provided by PTE 80–26. The
Department opined that the proceeds of
such an indemnification agreement
would not be used to pay ordinary
operating expenses of the plan or for a
purpose incidental to the ordinary
operation of the plan, as required by
section IV(b) of the exemption.
Subsequent to the issuance of
Advisory Opinion 2011–09A, several
practitioners informally notified the
Department that documents governing
the investment of an IRA’s or any other
5 See Amendment to Prohibited Transaction
Exemption 80–26 (PTE 80–26) for Certain Interest
Free Loans to Employee Benefit Plans, 71 FR 17917
(April 7, 2006).
6 67 FR 9483.
7 The Department notes that various terms are
used throughout this proposed amendment to PTE
80–26 to describe the types of provisions at issue.
For example, there are references to ‘‘security
interests,’’ ‘‘indemnification agreements,’’ and
‘‘cross-collateralization agreements,’’ discussed
below. For simplicity, where possible, the
Department uses the term indemnification
agreement to refer generically to such provisions.
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
31586
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Notices
plan’s assets frequently contain
provisions that may raise issues under
section 406(a)(1)(B) of the Act as well as
section 4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code, both
of which prohibit the lending of money
or other extensions of credit between a
plan and a party in interest or
disqualified person. These practitioners
state that account opening agreements,
described below, contain standard
‘‘cross-collateralization’’ provisions
which permit a broker or other financial
institution (hereinafter, unless
otherwise noted, a financial institution)
to transfer assets between multiple
accounts that an individual has
established with the financial
institution in order to cover investmentrelated losses or costs attributable to one
such account. For example, where an
IRA Owner opens an IRA and a personal
investment account with a financial
institution, and executes with the
financial institution an account opening
agreement that has a crosscollateralization provision covering both
accounts, the financial institution
would be authorized, pursuant to the
cross-collateralization provision, to,
thereafter, either: Transfer assets from
the IRA Owner’s personal investment
account to the IRA to cover certain
losses or costs or expenses attributable
to the IRA; or transfer assets from the
IRA to the IRA Owner’s personal
investment account to cover certain
losses or costs or expenses attributable
to the personal investment account. The
Department understands the mechanics
of the former arrangement to operate as
follows: if an expense attributable to an
IRA is debited to that account, and the
amount of such debit exceeds the
amount of assets held in the account, a
cross-collateralization provision permits
a financial institution to debit the IRA
Owner’s personal investment account
for that expense, and make a
corresponding credit of the same
amount to the IRA account.
The practitioners expressed concern
that, consistent with Advisory Opinion
2009–03A, a cross-collateralization
provision that constitutes a grant to a
financial institution of a security
interest in an IRA Owner’s non-IRA
accounts with the financial institution
in order to cover indebtedness of the
IRA, may be an impermissible
‘‘extension of credit’’ under section
4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code. The
practitioners expressed further concern
that, consistent with Advisory Opinion
2011–09A, such impermissible
‘‘extension of credit’’ may not be within
the scope of relief provided by PTE
80–26.
On December 12, 2011, the Internal
Revenue Service (the IRS) issued
VerDate Mar<15>2010
21:14 May 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
Announcement 2011–81. The
Announcement provides temporary
relief with respect to IRAs in
circumstances in which the IRA Owners
have signed certain indemnification
agreements or granted certain security
interests that may have an effect on their
IRAs. Specifically, in the
Announcement the IRS states that
‘‘[p]ending further action by the
[Department] and until issuance of
further guidance from the IRS
superseding [the Announcement], the
IRS will determine the tax consequences
relating to an IRA without taking into
account the consequences that might
otherwise result from a prohibited
transaction under section 4975 due to
entering into any indemnification
agreement or any cross-collateralization
agreement similar to the agreements
described in [the Department’s]
Advisory Opinions 2009–03A and
2011–09A, provided there has been no
execution or other enforcement
pursuant to the agreement against the
assets of an IRA of the individual
granting the security interest or entering
into the cross-collateralization
agreement.’’
D. Request for Exemptive Relief by
SIFMA
The Securities Industry and Financial
Markets Association (SIFMA) submitted
a letter to the Department dated
December 12, 2011. In the letter, SIFMA
states that, prior to Advisory Opinion
2009–03, most practitioners believed
that indemnification agreements and
other grants of security interests such as
those described in Advisory Opinions
2009–03A and 2011–09A, if never
called upon, did not violate the
prohibited transaction provisions of
ERISA or the Code. According to
SIFMA, most practitioners believed
further that even if these
indemnification agreements were seen
as prohibited transactions, PTE 80–26
extended exemptive relief to such
transactions. SIFMA indicated that
indemnification agreements were
commonly used in futures, brokerage,
options and other similar agreements.
In the December 12, 2011 letter,
SIFMA states also that Code section
408(e)(2)(A) provides that if an
individual who is an IRA Owner
engages in any transaction with his or
her IRA that is prohibited by Code
section 4975, the IRA is treated as if it
were distributed (and thus loses its taxqualified status) as of the first day of the
year in which the transaction took
place. SIFMA expresses concern that
after Advisory Opinion 2009–03A, the
practical impact of Advisory Opinion
2011–09A is that, absent immediate
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
relief, millions of IRA Owners may be
concerned that their accounts could be
disqualified and subject to taxation as of
the date they entered into the
indemnification agreement.
Likewise, according to SIFMA, relief
is necessary for plans other than IRAs
because of the Department’s conclusion
that an indemnification agreement,
uncalled upon, violates section
4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code. Since the
wording of section 406(a)(1)(B) of the
Act contains nearly identical language,
SIFMA expressed concern that standard
indemnification agreements entered into
with other types of plans may, in the
Department’s view, violate that section
of the Act as well. In SIFMA’s view,
retroactive relief would eliminate
concerns about potentially incorrect
past Form 5500 filings, and eliminate
questions from auditors with respect to
past related party transactions.
SIFMA subsequently submitted an
application for a class exemption or
amendment to PTE 80–26. Therein,
SIFMA states that brokerage, futures and
other investment agreements (‘‘Account
Opening Agreements’’) typically contain
language requiring all ‘‘related
accounts’’ to indemnify the service
provider against debits in an account,
regardless of whether those debits are
caused by unpaid fees, unpaid taxes,
unpaid third-party fees, or trading
losses. According to SIFMA,
indemnification language contained in
Account Opening Agreements is not
uniform, and the term ‘‘related
accounts’’ may not be defined with
specificity.
SIFMA provided several examples
regarding the mechanics of an
indemnification agreement. SIFMA
describes a scenario, for instance, in
which an IRA has an Account Opening
Agreement with a broker-dealer which
provides that if a debit arises in the IRA
account that remains unpaid after
demand, the IRA owner, who also has
a personal account at the broker-dealer,
guarantees the payment of the debit
from that personal account. If, for
example, the IRA account directs that a
security be sold but fails to deliver the
security for settlement, and there are
costs to cancel the trade, there will be
a debit to the IRA that could be charged
to the IRA owner’s personal account if
insufficient funds exist in the IRA
account. SIFMA also noted that
indemnification agreements can involve
situations in which funds are available
in a plan account but would result in
adverse consequences if they were used
to pay the indebtedness. An IRA that
owns a private fund interest that is not
immediately liquid, but needs to pay an
accountant to prepare a UBIT return is
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
an example. The accountant’s fee causes
a debit in the IRA account that cannot
be satisfied without liquidating the
private fund interest under unfavorable
terms. Consequently, pursuant to the
indemnification agreement, the debit
may be charged to the IRA owner’s
personal account. Each of these
examples could apply to a plan sponsor
who establishes the plan’s account and
maintains a corporate account with the
same financial institution.
SIFMA requests three categories of
exemptive relief for IRAs and other
plans. First, SIFMA requests a
retroactive exemption, effective January
1, 1975, for indemnification agreements,
as described herein, in favor of a
financial institution entered into by an
IRA or any other plan, regardless of
whether the indemnification agreement
has been called upon, executed or
enforced.
Second, SIFMA requests a temporary
exemption that would provide relief for
such indemnification agreements until a
date that is 12 months after final relief
is issued. According to SIFMA, this
temporary relief, if granted, would
provide banks and nonbank custodians,
brokers, futures commission merchants
and other financial institutions the time
necessary to determine how to amend
their account documents to either
eliminate the indemnification
agreements or to revise the provisions in
a way that will be compliant with the
Department’s position.
Third, SIFMA requests a prospective
exemption to explicitly permit plan
sponsors, the self-employed, and IRA
Owners to indemnify their IRAs and
other plans so that these entities may
continue to engage in short sales,
margin transactions, options and
futures.
E. Scope and Purpose of the Proposed
Amendment
As described in further detail below,
this proposed amendment, if adopted,
would provide retroactive and
temporary relief, as requested by
SIFMA. Such relief would be provided
for a ‘‘Covered Extension of Credit.’’ The
exemption defines this term as an
indemnification agreement, crosscollateralization agreement or other
grant of a security interest in favor of a
financial institution, as set forth in an
Account Opening Agreement between a
plan and the financial institution, by
which (1) assets in a Plan Account
guarantee the payment of amounts
debited to a Related Account, or (2)
assets in a Related Account guarantee
the payment of amounts debited to a
Plan Account. The term Covered
Extension of Credit does not include a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
21:14 May 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
loan or payment under such agreement
or security interest. A Plan Account is
an account established with a financial
institution by an employee benefit plan
as defined in section 3(3) of ERISA or
a plan as defined in section 4975(e)(1)
of the Code. A Related Account is an
account established pursuant to an
Account Opening Agreement with the
financial institution that also covers a
Plan Account and/or guarantees the
payment of debits to the Plan Account.
Retroactive and temporary relief is
additionally proposed for the lending of
money (a Covered Loan) by a Related
Account to a Plan Account, pursuant to
a Covered Extension of Credit, if the
Related Account is not itself a Plan
Account. Thus, although exemptive
relief is being proposed herein for a
Covered Extension of Credit between a
Plan Account and a Related Account,
where such Related Account may itself
be a Plan Account, exemptive relief for
a Covered Loan would not apply to
loans from Plan Accounts. Finally, the
retroactive and temporary relief extends
to the repayment by a Plan Account to
a Related Account of a Covered Loan
(Covered Repayment).
The Department is proposing the
relief described above solely to enable
financial institutions to remove Covered
Extensions of Credit from Account
Opening Agreements and conclude any
outstanding Covered Loans that may
exist. The Department believes that
broad retroactive and temporary
exemptive relief for Covered Extension
of Credit arrangements is appropriate
due to apparently widespread
misunderstanding as to the application
of the prohibited transaction provisions
and PTE 80–26 to the subject
transactions. The Department is of the
view that, due to practitioners’ good
faith belief in their compliance with the
prohibited transaction and class
exemption provisions as applied to
these transactions, it is appropriate to
propose exemptive relief that, if
adopted, would enable an IRA to
maintain its status under the Code,
notwithstanding that the IRA has been
subject to a Covered Extension of Credit
arrangement. Similarly, the Department
believes that it is appropriate to propose
relief that would enable a plan fiduciary
to avoid the costs and uncertainties that
may otherwise have arisen from the
plan’s participation in a Covered
Extension of Credit arrangement. The
Department has also included
retroactive relief from section 406(b)(1)
of ERISA and section 4975(c)(1)(E) of
the Code to cover the situation in which
a plan fiduciary entered into an
indemnification agreement which
would have permitted payment of debits
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
31587
by a Plan Account to a Related Account
maintained by such plan fiduciary.8
The Department is not proposing
permanent prospective exemptive relief
herein for Covered Extensions of Credit
(and loans and loan repayments
resulting therefrom), as requested by
SIFMA. In this regard, SIFMA has not
proposed conditions that would address
the proper oversight, monitoring, and
reporting of a Covered Loan or a
Covered Repayment, or that would
otherwise support a finding that
Covered Extension of Credit
arrangements are protective of affected
IRAs or other plans. The Department
notes, however, that future exemptive
relief may be available to the extent all
of the requisite findings under section
408(a) of ERISA can be made.
F. Description of the Proposed
Amendment
The proposed amendment, if adopted,
would add a new section to PTE 80–26,
entitled Section V. Temporary
Exemption, and would also re-designate
the Definitions section of PTE 80–26 as
Section VI. Definitions. The proposed
amendment does not otherwise affect
the relief set forth in section IV of the
existing class exemption.
As proposed, section V would contain
relief from ERISA sections 406(a)(1)(B)
and (D) and 406(b)(1) and (b)(2), as well
as Code sections 4975(a) and (b), by
reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B), (D) and
(E), for: (1) A Covered Extension of
Credit; (2) a Covered Loan to a Plan
Account that is made in connection
with a Covered Extension of Credit; and
(3) a Covered Repayment. The terms
Covered Extension of Credit, Covered
Loan, Plan Account, Covered
Repayment, Related Account and
Account Opening Agreement are
defined in section VI of the proposed
amendment, and are also described
below.
If adopted as proposed, the relief
contained in section V would extend
from January 1, 1975, until the date that
is six months after the date a final
amendment is adopted in the Federal
Register. The Department believes that
six months prospective relief provides
financial institutions ample time to
remove Covered Extensions of Credit
8 The Department notes however, that a sponsor
of a plan subject to Title I of ERISA who entered
into an account opening agreement permitting
indemnification by the plan of the sponsor’s
corporate accounts, where such plan sponsor
actually maintained a corporate account with the
same financial institution, may have engaged in a
violation of section 404 of ERISA. Class
exemptions, including the one proposed herein, if
granted, do not provide relief for fiduciaries with
respect to the fiduciary responsibility provisions of
section 404.
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
31588
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Notices
from clients’ Account Opening
Agreements, particularly in light of the
fact that financial institutions were put
on notice of the Department’s views on
these indemnification agreements in
2011.
The transactions described in section
V of this proposed amendment are
subject to several of the existing
conditions applicable to loans and
extensions of credit described in section
IV (b)(1) or (b)(2) of PTE 80–26. Section
V provides that, in connection with a
Covered Extension of Credit, Covered
Loan or Covered Repayment: no interest
or other fee may be charged to the IRA
or plan; no discount for payment in cash
is relinquished by the IRA or any other
plan; and no Covered Loan is made by
an IRA or any other plan. As noted
previously, exemptive relief is being
proposed herein for a Covered Loan
only to the extent that, among other
things, the Covered Loan is made to a
Plan Account by a non-plan Related
Account. Section V provides also that a
Covered Loan may not be the type of
loan described in section 408(b)(3) of
ERISA and the regulations promulgated
thereunder (29 CFR 2550.408b–3) or
section 4975(d)(3) of the Code and the
regulations promulgated thereunder (26
CFR 54.4975–7(b)).
The Department is proposing several
additional conditions that would be
applicable to the covered transactions.
In this regard, section V of the proposed
amendment requires that a Covered
Extension of Credit be set forth in a
written brokerage, futures and other
investment agreement (i.e., an Account
Opening Agreement) between an IRA or
any other plan and a financial
institution, and that such financial
institution be subject to oversight by a
regulatory agency or a self-regulatory
organization. The Department believes
that such oversight is necessary given
the lack of independent safeguards
associated with Covered Extensions of
Credit, as such arrangements are
understood by the Department.
The Department believes also that a
Covered Loan from a Related Account to
a Plan Account should arise from an
account debit to the Plan Account that
is lawful under relevant federal laws,
rules and regulations. Accordingly,
section V requires that any Covered
Loan by a Related Account to a Plan
Account must result from a lawful Plan
Account-incurred cost (including a fee,
expense, investment loss, or tax). To
ensure that the proposed amendment is
administratively feasible, section V
requires that, for purposes of the
proposed amendment, the amount of a
Covered Loan from a Related Account to
a Plan Account shall be no greater than
VerDate Mar<15>2010
21:14 May 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
the amount of the cost, fee, expense,
loss or tax incurred by the Plan Account
(which must be, as noted above, a
lawful cost under applicable law, rules
and regulations) for which the Covered
Loan is being made. The amount of any
Covered Repayment of a Covered Loan
by a Plan Account to a Related Account
must be no greater than the original
Covered Loan amount. Accordingly,
where, for example, a Plan Account has
incurred a $50 expense that meets the
terms of the proposed amendment, the
Covered Loan amount by a Related
Account to the Plan Account must be no
greater than $50, and any Covered
Repayment by the Plan Account to the
Related Account must also not exceed
$50.
Section VI of the proposed
amendment adds six defined terms to
that section. The term Covered
Extension of Credit is defined to mean
an indemnification agreement, crosscollateralization agreement or other
grant of a security interest in favor of a
financial institution, as set forth in an
Account Opening Agreement between a
plan and the financial institution, which
guarantees the payment of debits to (or
by) a Plan Account by (or to) a Related
Account. The Department notes that this
definition is intended to provide broad
relief for Plan Accounts that have been
subject to a Covered Extension of Credit,
and that remain subject to a Covered
Extension of Credit until six months
following the date on which this
proposed amendment is adopted. The
scope of the term Covered Loan is
narrower. This term is defined in
section VI to mean the lending of money
by a Related Account to a Plan Account,
including by means of a debit to the
Related Account and a corresponding
credit to the Plan Account, where the
Covered Loan is made pursuant to a
Covered Extension of Credit. As such,
the term Covered Loan does not include
a loan by a Plan Account to a Related
Account, notwithstanding that such
loan may be authorized by an Account
Opening Agreement. A Covered
Repayment is defined to mean a
repayment by a Plan Account to a
Related Account of a Covered Loan. A
Plan Account is defined to mean an
account established with a financial
institution by an employee benefit plan
as defined in section 3(3) of ERISA or
a plan as defined in section 4975(e)(1)
of the Code. The term Related Account
is defined in section VI to mean an
investment account established with a
financial institution by a person or
entity, where such account is subject to
an Account Opening Agreement with
the financial institution that also covers
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a Plan Account and/or guarantees the
payment of debits to the Plan Account.
Finally, the term Account Opening
Agreement is defined as a written
brokerage, futures or other investment
agreement.
G. Additional Proposed Amendments
on the Department’s Own Motion
As noted above, PTE 80–26 was most
recently amended effective December
15, 2004. Therein, the Department
eliminated a previous requirement of
the exemption that the proceeds of
certain loans or extensions of credit be
used only for a period of no more than
three business days. The Department
also added two new conditions,
conditions IV(e) and (f). Condition IV(e)
provides that: ‘‘[t]he loan is not
described in section 408(b)(3) of ERISA
and the regulations promulgated
thereunder (29 CFR 2550.408b–3) or
section 4975(d)(3) of the Code and the
regulations promulgated thereunder (26
CFR 54.4975–7(b))[.]’’
To clarify that this condition applies
equally to extensions of credit, the
Department is proposing to amend
condition IV(e) as follows:
‘‘[t]he loan or other extension of credit is
not described in section 408(b)(3) of ERISA
and the regulations promulgated thereunder
(29 CFR 2550.408b–3) or section 4975(d)(3)
of the Code and the regulations promulgated
thereunder (26 CFR 54.4975–7(b))[.]’’
Additionally, for consistency, the
Department is proposing to replace the
phrase ‘‘loan or extension of credit,’’
wherever it is used in sections of PTE
80–26 that have not expired, with the
phrase ‘‘loan or other extension of
credit.’’
General Information
The attention of interested persons is
directed to the following:
(1) The fact that a transaction is the
subject of an exemption under section
408(a) of ERISA and section 4975(c)(2)
of the Code does not relieve a fiduciary,
or other party in interest or disqualified
person with respect to a plan, from
certain other provisions of ERISA and
the Code, including any prohibited
transaction provisions to which the
exemption does not apply and the
general fiduciary responsibility
provisions of section 404 of ERISA
which require, among other things, that
a fiduciary act prudently and discharge
his or her duties respecting the plan
solely in the interests of the participants
and beneficiaries of the plan.
Additionally, the fact that a transaction
is the subject of an exemption does not
affect the requirement of section 401(a)
of the Code that the plan must operate
for the exclusive benefit of the
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Notices
employees of the employer maintaining
the plan and their beneficiaries;
(2) This exemption does not currently
extend to transactions prohibited under
section 406(b)(1) and (3) of the Act or
section 4975(c)(1)(E) or (F) of the Code.
If granted, the proposed amendment
would provide limited relief to certain
transactions prohibited under section
406(b)(1) of the Act and section
4975(c)(1)(E) of the Code;
(3) Before an exemption may be
granted under section 408(a) of ERISA
and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, the
Department must find that the
exemption is administratively feasible,
in the interests of the plan and of its
participants and beneficiaries, and
protective of the rights of participants
and beneficiaries of the plan;
(4) If granted, the proposed
amendment is applicable to a particular
transaction only if the transaction
satisfies the conditions specified in the
exemption; and
(5) The proposed amendment, if
granted, will be supplemental to, and
not in derogation of, any other
provisions of ERISA and the Code,
including statutory or administrative
exemptions and transitional rules.
Furthermore, the fact that a transaction
is subject to an administrative or
statutory exemption is not dispositive of
whether the transaction is in fact a
prohibited transaction.
Written Comments and Hearing
Request
The Department invites all interested
persons to submit written comments or
requests for a public hearing on the
proposed amendment to the address and
within the time period set forth above.
All comments received will be made a
part of the record. Comments and
requests for a hearing should state the
reasons for the writer’s interest in the
proposed exemption. Comments
received will be available for public
inspection at the above address.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Amendment
Under section 408(a) of the Act and
section 4975(c)(2) of the Code and in
accordance with the procedures set
forth in 29 CFR 2570, Subpart B (76 FR
66637, 66644, October 27, 2011), the
Department proposes to amend PTE 80–
26 as set forth below:
Section I. Retroactive General
Exemption
Effective January 1, 1975 until
December 14, 2004 the restrictions of
section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section
406(b)(2) of the Act, and the taxes
imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of
the Code, by reason of section
VerDate Mar<15>2010
21:14 May 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, shall
not apply to the lending of money or
other extension of credit from a party in
interest or disqualified person to an
employee benefit plan, nor to the
repayment of such loan or other
extension of credit in accordance with
its terms or written modifications
thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged
to the plan, and no discount for
payment in cash is relinquished by the
plan, in connection with the loan or
extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or
extension of credit are used only—
(1) for the payment of ordinary
operating expenses of the plan,
including the payment of benefits in
accordance with the terms of the plan
and periodic premiums under an
insurance or annuity contract, or
(2) for a period of no more than three
business days, for a purpose incidental
to the ordinary operation of the plan;
(c) The loan or extension of credit is
unsecured; and
(d) The loan or extension of credit is
not directly or indirectly made by an
employee benefit plan.
Section II: Temporary Exemption
Effective November 1, 1999 through
December 31, 2000, the restrictions of
section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section
406(b)(2) of the Act, and the taxes
imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of
the Code, by reason of section
4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, shall
not apply to the lending of money or
other extension of credit from a party in
interest or disqualified person to an
employee benefit plan, nor to the
repayment of such loan or other
extension of credit in accordance with
its terms or written modifications
thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged
to the plan, and no discount for
payment in cash is relinquished by the
plan, in connection with the loan or
extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or
extension of credit are used only for a
purpose incidental to the ordinary
operation of the plan which arises in
connection with the plan’s inability to
liquidate, or otherwise access its assets
or access data as a result of a Y2K
problem.
(c) The loan or extension of credit is
unsecured;
(d) The loan or extension of credit is
not directly or indirectly made by an
employee benefit plan; and
(e) The loan or extension of credit
begins on or after November 1, 1999 and
is repaid or terminated no later than
December 31, 2000.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
31589
Section III. September 11, 2001 Market
Disruption Exemption
Effective September 11, 2001 through
January 9, 2002, the restrictions of
section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section
406(b)(2) of the Act, and the taxes
imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of
the Code, by reason of section
4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, shall
not apply to the lending of money or
other extension of credit from a party in
interest or disqualified person to an
employee benefit plan, nor to the
repayment of such loan or other
extension of credit in accordance with
its terms or written modifications
thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged
to the plan, and no discount for
payment in cash is relinquished by the
plan, in connection with the loan or
extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or
extension of credit are used only for a
purpose incidental to the ordinary
operation of the plan which arises in
connection with difficulties
encountered by the plan in liquidating,
or otherwise accessing its assets, or
accessing its data in a timely manner as
a direct or indirect result of the
September 11, 2001 disruption;
(c) The loan or extension of credit is
unsecured;
(d) The loan or extension of credit is
not directly or indirectly made by an
employee benefit plan; and
(e) The loan or extension of credit
begins on or after September 11, 2001,
and is repaid or terminated no later than
January 9, 2002.
Section IV. Prospective General
Exemption
Effective as of December 15, 2004, the
restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(B) and
(D) and section 406(b)(2) of the Act, and
the taxes imposed by section 4975(a)
and (b) of the Code, by reason of section
4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, shall
not apply to the lending of money or
other extension of credit from a party in
interest or disqualified person to an
employee benefit plan, nor to the
repayment of such loan or other
extension of credit in accordance with
its terms or written modifications
thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged
to the plan, and no discount for
payment in cash is relinquished by the
plan, in connection with the loan or
other extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or other
extension of credit are used only—
(1) for the payment of ordinary
operating expenses of the plan,
including the payment of benefits in
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
31590
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Notices
accordance with the terms of the plan
and periodic premiums under an
insurance or annuity contract, or
(2) for a purpose incidental to the
ordinary operation of the plan;
(c) The loan or other extension of
credit is unsecured;
(d) The loan or other extension of
credit is not directly or indirectly made
by an employee benefit plan;
(e) The loan or other extension of
credit is not described in section
408(b)(3) of ERISA and the regulations
promulgated thereunder (29 CFR
2550.408b–3) or section 4975(d)(3) of
the Code and the regulations
promulgated thereunder (26 CFR
54.4975–7(b)); and
(f)(1) Any loan described in section
IV(b)(1) that is entered into on or after
April 7, 2006 and that has a term of 60
days or longer must be made pursuant
to a written loan agreement that
contains all of the material terms of
such loan;
(2) Any loan described in (b)(2) of this
paragraph that is entered into for a term
of 60 days or longer must be made
pursuant to a written loan agreement
that contains all of the material terms of
such loan.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Section V: Temporary Exemption
The restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(B)
and (D) and section 406(b)(1) and (b)(2)
of the Act, and the taxes imposed by
section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code, by
reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B), (D) and
(E) of the Code, shall not apply, from
January 1, 1975, until the date that is six
months following the date a final
amendment is published in the Federal
Register, to: (1) A Covered Extension of
Credit, as defined in section VI(e); (2) a
Covered Loan, as defined in section
VI(f); and (3) a Covered Repayment (as
defined in section VI(g)) if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged
to the plan, and no discount for
payment in cash is relinquished by the
plan, in connection with the Covered
Extension of Credit, Covered Loan, or
Covered Repayment;
(b) The Covered Extension of Credit is
set forth in an Account Opening
Agreement between a plan and a
financial institution, where the financial
institution is subject to oversight by a
regulatory agency or a self-regulatory
organization;
(c) The Covered Loan is not directly
or indirectly made by a plan;
(d) The Covered Extension of Credit
and the Covered Loan are not described
in section 408(b)(3) of ERISA and the
regulations promulgated thereunder (29
CFR 2550.408b–3) or section 4975(d)(3)
of the Code and the regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
21:14 May 23, 2013
Jkt 229001
promulgated thereunder (26 CFR
54.4975–7(b));
(e) The Covered Loan arose from a
lawful cost (including a fee, expense,
investment loss or tax); and
(f) The amount of a Covered Loan
from a Related Account to a Plan
Account is no greater than and relates
to an amount debited to the Plan
Account in connection with an expense
described in paragraph (e) of this
section. The amount of a Covered
Repayment of a Covered Loan must not
be greater than the original Covered
Loan amount.
Section VI. Definitions
(a) For purposes of section II, a ‘‘Y2K
problem’’ is a disruption of computer
operations resulting from a computer
system’s inability to process data
because such system recognizes years
only by the last two digits, causing a
‘‘00’’ entry to be read as the year ‘‘1900’’
rather than the year ‘‘2000.’’
(b) For purposes of section III, the
‘‘September 11, 2001 disruption’’ is the
disruption to the United States financial
and securities markets and/or the
operation of persons providing
administrative services to employee
benefit plans, resulting from the acts of
terrorism that occurred on September
11, 2001;
(c) For purposes of this exemption,
the terms ‘‘employee benefit plan’’ and
‘‘plan’’ refer to an employee benefit plan
described in ERISA section 3(3) and/or
a plan described in section 4975(e)(1) of
the Code;
(d) For purposes of section V, the term
‘‘Plan Account’’ means an account
established with a financial institution
by an employee benefit plan described
in section 3(3) of ERISA or a plan
described in section 4975(e)(1) of the
Code.
(e) For purposes of section V, the term
‘‘Covered Extension of Credit’’ means an
indemnification agreement, crosscollateralization agreement or other
grant of a security interest in favor of a
financial institution, as set forth in an
Account Opening Agreement between a
plan and the financial institution, which
guarantees the payment of debits to (or
by) a Plan Account by (or to) a Related
Account, but does not include a loan or
payment under such agreement or
security interest;
(f) For purposes of section V, the term
‘‘Covered Loan’’ means a loan to a Plan
Account by a Related Account,
including by means of a debit to a
Related Account and a corresponding
credit to the Plan Account, where the
Covered Loan is made pursuant to a
Covered Extension of Credit;
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(g) For purposes of section V, the term
‘‘Covered Repayment’’ means the
repayment by a Plan Account to a
Related Account of a Covered Loan.
(h) For purposes of section V, the term
‘‘Related Account’’ means an
investment account established with a
financial institution by a person or
entity, where such account is subject to
an Account Opening Agreement with
the financial institution that also covers
a Plan Account and/or guarantees the
payment of debits to the Plan Account.
(i) For purposes of section V, the term
‘‘Account Opening Agreement’’ means a
written brokerage, futures or other
investment agreement.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 20th day of
May, 2013.
Lyssa E. Hall,
Director, Office of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security Administration,
U. S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2013–12362 Filed 5–23–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–29–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–81,253]
Sears Holdings Management
Corporation, A Division Of Sears
Holdings Corporation, Hoffman
Estates, Illinois; Notice of Negative
Determination on Reconsideration
On August 3, 2012, the Department of
Labor issued an Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration for the workers and
former workers of Sears Holdings
Management Corporation, Hoffman
Estates, Illinois (subject firm). The
Department’s Notice of determination
was published in the Federal Register
on August 14, 2012 (77 FR 48550).
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c),
reconsideration may be granted under
the following circumstances:
(1) If it appears on the basis of facts
not previously considered that the
determination complained of was
erroneous;
(2) If it appears that the determination
complained of was based on a mistake
in the determination of facts not
previously considered; or
(3) If in the opinion of the Certifying
Officer, a misinterpretation of facts or of
the law justified reconsideration of the
decision.
During the initial investigation, the
Department received information that
the petitioners worked in different units
of the subject firm: one petitioner
worked in the marketing unit, another
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 101 (Friday, May 24, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31584-31590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12362]
[[Page 31584]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employee Benefits Security Administration
[Application Number D-11716]
RIN 1210-ZA21
Notice of Proposed Amendment to Prohibited Transaction Exemption
80-26 (PTE 80-26) For Certain Interest Free Loans to Employee Benefit
Plans
AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Amendment to PTE 80-26.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains a notice of pendency before the
Department of Labor (the Department) of a proposed amendment to PTE 80-
26. PTE 80-26 is a class exemption that permits parties in interest
with respect to employee benefit plans to make certain interest free
loans and extensions of credit to such plans, provided the conditions
of the exemption are met. The proposed amendment, if adopted, would
give retroactive and temporary exemptive relief for certain guarantees
of the payment of debits to plan investment accounts (including IRAs)
by parties in interest to such plans as well as certain loans and loan
repayments made pursuant to such guarantees. The proposed amendment
would affect employee benefit plans described in section 3(3) of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA or
the Act), and plans described in section 4975(e)(1) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), the participants and
beneficiaries of such plans, and parties in interest with respect to
those plans engaging in the described transactions.
DATES: If adopted, the proposed amendment will be effective from
January 1, 1975, until the date that is six months after the date on
which an adopted amendment is published in the Federal Register.
Written comments and requests for a public hearing should be received
by the Department on or before July 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: All written comments and requests for a public hearing
concerning the proposed amendment should be sent to the Office of
Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits Security Administration,
Room N-5700, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210, Attention: PTE 80-26 Amendment. Interested
persons are also invited to submit comments and hearing requests to
EBSA, by the end of the scheduled comment period, via email to:
moffitt.betty@dol.gov or by using the Federal eRulemaking portal at
https://regulations.gov, Docket ID: EBSA-2012-0030 (following the
instructions for the submission of comments found on this Web site).
The comments received will be available for public inspection in the
Public Disclosure Room of the Employee Benefits Security
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-1513, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Comments and hearing requests will
also be available online at www.regulations.gov and www.dol.gov/ebsa,
at no charge.
Warning: All comments will be made available to the public. Do not
include any personally identifiable information (such as name, address,
or other contact information) or confidential business information that
you do not want publicly disclosed. All comments may be posted on the
Internet and can be retrieved by most Internet search engines.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Motta, Office of Exemption
Determinations, Employee Benefits Security Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, (202) 693-8540 (this is not a toll-free number).
Executive Order 12866 and 13563 Statement
Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, the Department must
determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore
subject to the requirements of the Executive Order and subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Executive Orders
13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to
select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects,
distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs,
of harmonizing and streamlining rules, and of promoting flexibility. It
also requires federal agencies to develop a plan under which the
agencies will periodically review their existing significant
regulations to make the agencies' regulatory programs more effective or
less burdensome in achieving their regulatory objectives.
Under Executive Order 12866, ``significant'' regulatory actions are
subject to the requirements of the Executive Order and review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866, defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action that is
likely to result in a rule (1) having an annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more, or adversely and materially affecting a sector
of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or
communities (also referred to as ``economically significant''); (2)
creating serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action
taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially altering the
budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or
the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raising novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's
priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of the Executive Order, it has been determined
that this action is not ``significant'' within the meaning of section
3(f) of the Executive Order and therefore is not subject to review by
OMB.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given of the pendency
before the Department of a proposed amendment to PTE 80-26.\1\ PTE 80-
26 provides an exemption from the restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(B)
and (D) and section 406(b)(2) of ERISA and from the taxes imposed by
section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B)
and (D) of the Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 45 FR 28545 (April 29, 1980), as corrected at 45 FR 35040
(May 23, 1980) and amended at: 65 FR 17540 (April 3, 2000); 67 FR
9483 (March 1, 2002); 67 FR 9485 (March 1, 2002); and 71 FR 17917
(April 7, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed amendment was requested by the Securities Industry and
Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) pursuant to section 408(a) of
ERISA and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, and in accordance with the
procedures set forth in 29 CFR Part 2570, Subpart B (76 FR 66637,
October 27, 2011).\2\ SIFMA requests that the relief provided by this
proposed amendment to PTE 80-26 include relief from section 406(b)(1)
of ERISA and section 4975(c)(1)(E) of the Code.\3\ In addition to
proposing certain relief requested by SIFMA, the
[[Page 31585]]
Department is proposing on its own motion another amendment to PTE 80-
26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Section 102 of the Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978 (5
U.S.C. App. 1 [1996]) generally transferred the authority of the
Secretary of the Treasury to issue administrative exemptions under
section 4975 of the Code to the Secretary of Labor.
\3\ Hereinafter, references to specific provisions of ERISA
should be read as referring also to the corresponding provisions of
section 4975 of the Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. General Background
The prohibited transaction provisions of the Act generally prohibit
transactions between a plan and a party in interest (including a
fiduciary) with respect to such plan. Specifically, section
406(a)(1)(B) and (D) of the Act provides that a fiduciary with respect
to a plan shall not cause the plan to engage in a transaction, if he
knows or should know that such transaction constitutes a direct or
indirect--
(B) lending of money or other extension of credit between the plan
and a party in interest; and
(D) transfer to, or use by or for the benefit of, a party in
interest, of any assets of the plan.
Section 4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code contain parallel
provisions with respect to plans described in section 4975(e)(1) of the
Code.
Accordingly, unless a statutory or administrative exemption is
applicable, loans, including interest free loans, extensions of credit,
and repayment of such loans, between a plan and a party in interest,
are prohibited.
In addition, section 406(b)(1) and (b)(2) of the Act prohibits a
fiduciary with respect to a plan from dealing with the assets of the
plan in his own interest or for his own account, and from acting in his
individual capacity or any other capacity in any transaction involving
the plan on behalf of a party (or representing a party) whose interests
are adverse to the interests of the plan or the interests of its
participants or beneficiaries. Section 4975(c)(1)(E) of the Code
contains a parallel provision to section 406(b)(1) of the Act. Section
4975 of the Code does not contain a parallel provision with respect to
section 406(b)(2) of the Act.
Prohibited transactions that involve plans described in section
4975(e)(1) of the Code, including individual retirement accounts
(IRAs), are generally subject to taxation under section 4975 of the
Code. Additionally, section 408(e)(2) of the Code provides that if,
during any taxable year of the individual for whose benefit any IRA is
established, that individual or his or her beneficiary (hereinafter, an
IRA Owner) engages in any transaction prohibited by section 4975 with
respect to such account, such account ceases to be an IRA as of the
first day of such taxable year.
B. Description of Class Exemption
The general exemption in PTE 80-26,\4\ as amended effective
December 15, 2004, permits the lending of money or other extension of
credit from a party in interest or disqualified person to an employee
benefit plan, and the repayment of such loan or other extension of
credit in accordance with its terms or other written modifications
thereof, if:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The general exemption is set forth in section IV of PTE 80-
26. Sections I-III of the exemption provided relief for limited time
periods, all of which have expired.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) No interest or other fee is charged to the plan, and no
discount for payment in cash is relinquished by the plan, in connection
with the loan or extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or extension of credit are used only--
(1) for the payment of ordinary operating expenses of the plan,
including the payment of benefits in accordance with the terms of the
plan and periodic premiums under an insurance or annuity contract, or
(2) for a purpose incidental to the ordinary operation of the plan;
(c) The loan or extension of credit is unsecured;
(d) The loan or extension of credit is not directly or indirectly
made by an employee benefit plan;
(e) The loan is not described in section 408(b)(3) of ERISA and the
regulations promulgated thereunder (29 CFR 2550.408b-3) or section
4975(d)(3) of the Code and the regulations promulgated thereunder (26
CFR 54.4975-7(b)); and
(f)(1) Any loan described in section IV(b)(1) that is entered into
on or after April 7, 2006 and that has a term of 60 days or longer must
be made pursuant to a written loan agreement that contains all of the
material terms of such loan;
(2) Any loan described in (b)(2) of this paragraph that is entered
into for a term of 60 days or longer must be made pursuant to a written
loan agreement that contains all of the material terms of such loan.
For transactions that meet these conditions, the restrictions of
ERISA section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and ERISA section 406(b)(2), and the
taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code, by reason of
section 4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, do not apply.
The most recent amendment to PTE 80-26 was finalized on April 7,
2006, but was generally effective December 15, 2004. The purpose of the
amendment was to eliminate a requirement of the exemption that the
proceeds of certain loans or extensions of credit be used only for a
period of no more than three business days.\5\ Additionally, as part of
the amendment, the Department added conditions (e) and (f), above. The
effective date of those conditions relates to the date of the
publication of the final amendment as opposed to the effective date of
the proposed amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Amendment to Prohibited Transaction Exemption 80-26 (PTE
80-26) for Certain Interest Free Loans to Employee Benefit Plans, 71
FR 17917 (April 7, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 1, 2002, the Department adopted an amendment affecting
several class exemptions, including PTE 80-26.\6\ The amendment defines
the terms ``employee benefit plan'' and ``plan'' for purposes of the
affected class exemptions as ``an employee benefit plan described in
ERISA section 3(3) and/or a plan described in section 4975(e)(1) of the
Code.'' Accordingly, the Department clarified that PTE 80-26 provided
relief for transactions involving IRAs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 67 FR 9483.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Background on This Proposed Amendment to PTE 80-26
On October 27, 2009, the Department issued Advisory Opinion 2009-
03A, which states that the grant by an IRA Owner to a broker of a
security interest in the IRA Owner's non-IRA accounts with the broker,
in order to cover indebtedness of, or arising from, the IRA, would be
an impermissible ``extension of credit'' under section 4975(c)(1)(B) of
the Code. Thereafter, on October 20, 2011, the Department issued
Advisory Opinion 2011-09A, which states that an IRA Owner's agreement
to indemnify the broker for losses suffered by the IRA account with the
broker (hereinafter, an indemnification agreement) \7\ is not within
the scope of relief provided by PTE 80-26. The Department opined that
the proceeds of such an indemnification agreement would not be used to
pay ordinary operating expenses of the plan or for a purpose incidental
to the ordinary operation of the plan, as required by section IV(b) of
the exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The Department notes that various terms are used throughout
this proposed amendment to PTE 80-26 to describe the types of
provisions at issue. For example, there are references to ``security
interests,'' ``indemnification agreements,'' and ``cross-
collateralization agreements,'' discussed below. For simplicity,
where possible, the Department uses the term indemnification
agreement to refer generically to such provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsequent to the issuance of Advisory Opinion 2011-09A, several
practitioners informally notified the Department that documents
governing the investment of an IRA's or any other
[[Page 31586]]
plan's assets frequently contain provisions that may raise issues under
section 406(a)(1)(B) of the Act as well as section 4975(c)(1)(B) of the
Code, both of which prohibit the lending of money or other extensions
of credit between a plan and a party in interest or disqualified
person. These practitioners state that account opening agreements,
described below, contain standard ``cross-collateralization''
provisions which permit a broker or other financial institution
(hereinafter, unless otherwise noted, a financial institution) to
transfer assets between multiple accounts that an individual has
established with the financial institution in order to cover
investment-related losses or costs attributable to one such account.
For example, where an IRA Owner opens an IRA and a personal investment
account with a financial institution, and executes with the financial
institution an account opening agreement that has a cross-
collateralization provision covering both accounts, the financial
institution would be authorized, pursuant to the cross-
collateralization provision, to, thereafter, either: Transfer assets
from the IRA Owner's personal investment account to the IRA to cover
certain losses or costs or expenses attributable to the IRA; or
transfer assets from the IRA to the IRA Owner's personal investment
account to cover certain losses or costs or expenses attributable to
the personal investment account. The Department understands the
mechanics of the former arrangement to operate as follows: if an
expense attributable to an IRA is debited to that account, and the
amount of such debit exceeds the amount of assets held in the account,
a cross-collateralization provision permits a financial institution to
debit the IRA Owner's personal investment account for that expense, and
make a corresponding credit of the same amount to the IRA account.
The practitioners expressed concern that, consistent with Advisory
Opinion 2009-03A, a cross-collateralization provision that constitutes
a grant to a financial institution of a security interest in an IRA
Owner's non-IRA accounts with the financial institution in order to
cover indebtedness of the IRA, may be an impermissible ``extension of
credit'' under section 4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code. The practitioners
expressed further concern that, consistent with Advisory Opinion 2011-
09A, such impermissible ``extension of credit'' may not be within the
scope of relief provided by PTE 80-26.
On December 12, 2011, the Internal Revenue Service (the IRS) issued
Announcement 2011-81. The Announcement provides temporary relief with
respect to IRAs in circumstances in which the IRA Owners have signed
certain indemnification agreements or granted certain security
interests that may have an effect on their IRAs. Specifically, in the
Announcement the IRS states that ``[p]ending further action by the
[Department] and until issuance of further guidance from the IRS
superseding [the Announcement], the IRS will determine the tax
consequences relating to an IRA without taking into account the
consequences that might otherwise result from a prohibited transaction
under section 4975 due to entering into any indemnification agreement
or any cross-collateralization agreement similar to the agreements
described in [the Department's] Advisory Opinions 2009-03A and 2011-
09A, provided there has been no execution or other enforcement pursuant
to the agreement against the assets of an IRA of the individual
granting the security interest or entering into the cross-
collateralization agreement.''
D. Request for Exemptive Relief by SIFMA
The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA)
submitted a letter to the Department dated December 12, 2011. In the
letter, SIFMA states that, prior to Advisory Opinion 2009-03, most
practitioners believed that indemnification agreements and other grants
of security interests such as those described in Advisory Opinions
2009-03A and 2011-09A, if never called upon, did not violate the
prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA or the Code. According to
SIFMA, most practitioners believed further that even if these
indemnification agreements were seen as prohibited transactions, PTE
80-26 extended exemptive relief to such transactions. SIFMA indicated
that indemnification agreements were commonly used in futures,
brokerage, options and other similar agreements.
In the December 12, 2011 letter, SIFMA states also that Code
section 408(e)(2)(A) provides that if an individual who is an IRA Owner
engages in any transaction with his or her IRA that is prohibited by
Code section 4975, the IRA is treated as if it were distributed (and
thus loses its tax-qualified status) as of the first day of the year in
which the transaction took place. SIFMA expresses concern that after
Advisory Opinion 2009-03A, the practical impact of Advisory Opinion
2011-09A is that, absent immediate relief, millions of IRA Owners may
be concerned that their accounts could be disqualified and subject to
taxation as of the date they entered into the indemnification
agreement.
Likewise, according to SIFMA, relief is necessary for plans other
than IRAs because of the Department's conclusion that an
indemnification agreement, uncalled upon, violates section
4975(c)(1)(B) of the Code. Since the wording of section 406(a)(1)(B) of
the Act contains nearly identical language, SIFMA expressed concern
that standard indemnification agreements entered into with other types
of plans may, in the Department's view, violate that section of the Act
as well. In SIFMA's view, retroactive relief would eliminate concerns
about potentially incorrect past Form 5500 filings, and eliminate
questions from auditors with respect to past related party
transactions.
SIFMA subsequently submitted an application for a class exemption
or amendment to PTE 80-26. Therein, SIFMA states that brokerage,
futures and other investment agreements (``Account Opening
Agreements'') typically contain language requiring all ``related
accounts'' to indemnify the service provider against debits in an
account, regardless of whether those debits are caused by unpaid fees,
unpaid taxes, unpaid third-party fees, or trading losses. According to
SIFMA, indemnification language contained in Account Opening Agreements
is not uniform, and the term ``related accounts'' may not be defined
with specificity.
SIFMA provided several examples regarding the mechanics of an
indemnification agreement. SIFMA describes a scenario, for instance, in
which an IRA has an Account Opening Agreement with a broker-dealer
which provides that if a debit arises in the IRA account that remains
unpaid after demand, the IRA owner, who also has a personal account at
the broker-dealer, guarantees the payment of the debit from that
personal account. If, for example, the IRA account directs that a
security be sold but fails to deliver the security for settlement, and
there are costs to cancel the trade, there will be a debit to the IRA
that could be charged to the IRA owner's personal account if
insufficient funds exist in the IRA account. SIFMA also noted that
indemnification agreements can involve situations in which funds are
available in a plan account but would result in adverse consequences if
they were used to pay the indebtedness. An IRA that owns a private fund
interest that is not immediately liquid, but needs to pay an accountant
to prepare a UBIT return is
[[Page 31587]]
an example. The accountant's fee causes a debit in the IRA account that
cannot be satisfied without liquidating the private fund interest under
unfavorable terms. Consequently, pursuant to the indemnification
agreement, the debit may be charged to the IRA owner's personal
account. Each of these examples could apply to a plan sponsor who
establishes the plan's account and maintains a corporate account with
the same financial institution.
SIFMA requests three categories of exemptive relief for IRAs and
other plans. First, SIFMA requests a retroactive exemption, effective
January 1, 1975, for indemnification agreements, as described herein,
in favor of a financial institution entered into by an IRA or any other
plan, regardless of whether the indemnification agreement has been
called upon, executed or enforced.
Second, SIFMA requests a temporary exemption that would provide
relief for such indemnification agreements until a date that is 12
months after final relief is issued. According to SIFMA, this temporary
relief, if granted, would provide banks and nonbank custodians,
brokers, futures commission merchants and other financial institutions
the time necessary to determine how to amend their account documents to
either eliminate the indemnification agreements or to revise the
provisions in a way that will be compliant with the Department's
position.
Third, SIFMA requests a prospective exemption to explicitly permit
plan sponsors, the self-employed, and IRA Owners to indemnify their
IRAs and other plans so that these entities may continue to engage in
short sales, margin transactions, options and futures.
E. Scope and Purpose of the Proposed Amendment
As described in further detail below, this proposed amendment, if
adopted, would provide retroactive and temporary relief, as requested
by SIFMA. Such relief would be provided for a ``Covered Extension of
Credit.'' The exemption defines this term as an indemnification
agreement, cross-collateralization agreement or other grant of a
security interest in favor of a financial institution, as set forth in
an Account Opening Agreement between a plan and the financial
institution, by which (1) assets in a Plan Account guarantee the
payment of amounts debited to a Related Account, or (2) assets in a
Related Account guarantee the payment of amounts debited to a Plan
Account. The term Covered Extension of Credit does not include a loan
or payment under such agreement or security interest. A Plan Account is
an account established with a financial institution by an employee
benefit plan as defined in section 3(3) of ERISA or a plan as defined
in section 4975(e)(1) of the Code. A Related Account is an account
established pursuant to an Account Opening Agreement with the financial
institution that also covers a Plan Account and/or guarantees the
payment of debits to the Plan Account.
Retroactive and temporary relief is additionally proposed for the
lending of money (a Covered Loan) by a Related Account to a Plan
Account, pursuant to a Covered Extension of Credit, if the Related
Account is not itself a Plan Account. Thus, although exemptive relief
is being proposed herein for a Covered Extension of Credit between a
Plan Account and a Related Account, where such Related Account may
itself be a Plan Account, exemptive relief for a Covered Loan would not
apply to loans from Plan Accounts. Finally, the retroactive and
temporary relief extends to the repayment by a Plan Account to a
Related Account of a Covered Loan (Covered Repayment).
The Department is proposing the relief described above solely to
enable financial institutions to remove Covered Extensions of Credit
from Account Opening Agreements and conclude any outstanding Covered
Loans that may exist. The Department believes that broad retroactive
and temporary exemptive relief for Covered Extension of Credit
arrangements is appropriate due to apparently widespread
misunderstanding as to the application of the prohibited transaction
provisions and PTE 80-26 to the subject transactions. The Department is
of the view that, due to practitioners' good faith belief in their
compliance with the prohibited transaction and class exemption
provisions as applied to these transactions, it is appropriate to
propose exemptive relief that, if adopted, would enable an IRA to
maintain its status under the Code, notwithstanding that the IRA has
been subject to a Covered Extension of Credit arrangement. Similarly,
the Department believes that it is appropriate to propose relief that
would enable a plan fiduciary to avoid the costs and uncertainties that
may otherwise have arisen from the plan's participation in a Covered
Extension of Credit arrangement. The Department has also included
retroactive relief from section 406(b)(1) of ERISA and section
4975(c)(1)(E) of the Code to cover the situation in which a plan
fiduciary entered into an indemnification agreement which would have
permitted payment of debits by a Plan Account to a Related Account
maintained by such plan fiduciary.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Department notes however, that a sponsor of a plan
subject to Title I of ERISA who entered into an account opening
agreement permitting indemnification by the plan of the sponsor's
corporate accounts, where such plan sponsor actually maintained a
corporate account with the same financial institution, may have
engaged in a violation of section 404 of ERISA. Class exemptions,
including the one proposed herein, if granted, do not provide relief
for fiduciaries with respect to the fiduciary responsibility
provisions of section 404.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department is not proposing permanent prospective exemptive
relief herein for Covered Extensions of Credit (and loans and loan
repayments resulting therefrom), as requested by SIFMA. In this regard,
SIFMA has not proposed conditions that would address the proper
oversight, monitoring, and reporting of a Covered Loan or a Covered
Repayment, or that would otherwise support a finding that Covered
Extension of Credit arrangements are protective of affected IRAs or
other plans. The Department notes, however, that future exemptive
relief may be available to the extent all of the requisite findings
under section 408(a) of ERISA can be made.
F. Description of the Proposed Amendment
The proposed amendment, if adopted, would add a new section to PTE
80-26, entitled Section V. Temporary Exemption, and would also re-
designate the Definitions section of PTE 80-26 as Section VI.
Definitions. The proposed amendment does not otherwise affect the
relief set forth in section IV of the existing class exemption.
As proposed, section V would contain relief from ERISA sections
406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and 406(b)(1) and (b)(2), as well as Code sections
4975(a) and (b), by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B), (D) and (E), for:
(1) A Covered Extension of Credit; (2) a Covered Loan to a Plan Account
that is made in connection with a Covered Extension of Credit; and (3)
a Covered Repayment. The terms Covered Extension of Credit, Covered
Loan, Plan Account, Covered Repayment, Related Account and Account
Opening Agreement are defined in section VI of the proposed amendment,
and are also described below.
If adopted as proposed, the relief contained in section V would
extend from January 1, 1975, until the date that is six months after
the date a final amendment is adopted in the Federal Register. The
Department believes that six months prospective relief provides
financial institutions ample time to remove Covered Extensions of
Credit
[[Page 31588]]
from clients' Account Opening Agreements, particularly in light of the
fact that financial institutions were put on notice of the Department's
views on these indemnification agreements in 2011.
The transactions described in section V of this proposed amendment
are subject to several of the existing conditions applicable to loans
and extensions of credit described in section IV (b)(1) or (b)(2) of
PTE 80-26. Section V provides that, in connection with a Covered
Extension of Credit, Covered Loan or Covered Repayment: no interest or
other fee may be charged to the IRA or plan; no discount for payment in
cash is relinquished by the IRA or any other plan; and no Covered Loan
is made by an IRA or any other plan. As noted previously, exemptive
relief is being proposed herein for a Covered Loan only to the extent
that, among other things, the Covered Loan is made to a Plan Account by
a non-plan Related Account. Section V provides also that a Covered Loan
may not be the type of loan described in section 408(b)(3) of ERISA and
the regulations promulgated thereunder (29 CFR 2550.408b-3) or section
4975(d)(3) of the Code and the regulations promulgated thereunder (26
CFR 54.4975-7(b)).
The Department is proposing several additional conditions that
would be applicable to the covered transactions. In this regard,
section V of the proposed amendment requires that a Covered Extension
of Credit be set forth in a written brokerage, futures and other
investment agreement (i.e., an Account Opening Agreement) between an
IRA or any other plan and a financial institution, and that such
financial institution be subject to oversight by a regulatory agency or
a self-regulatory organization. The Department believes that such
oversight is necessary given the lack of independent safeguards
associated with Covered Extensions of Credit, as such arrangements are
understood by the Department.
The Department believes also that a Covered Loan from a Related
Account to a Plan Account should arise from an account debit to the
Plan Account that is lawful under relevant federal laws, rules and
regulations. Accordingly, section V requires that any Covered Loan by a
Related Account to a Plan Account must result from a lawful Plan
Account-incurred cost (including a fee, expense, investment loss, or
tax). To ensure that the proposed amendment is administratively
feasible, section V requires that, for purposes of the proposed
amendment, the amount of a Covered Loan from a Related Account to a
Plan Account shall be no greater than the amount of the cost, fee,
expense, loss or tax incurred by the Plan Account (which must be, as
noted above, a lawful cost under applicable law, rules and regulations)
for which the Covered Loan is being made. The amount of any Covered
Repayment of a Covered Loan by a Plan Account to a Related Account must
be no greater than the original Covered Loan amount. Accordingly,
where, for example, a Plan Account has incurred a $50 expense that
meets the terms of the proposed amendment, the Covered Loan amount by a
Related Account to the Plan Account must be no greater than $50, and
any Covered Repayment by the Plan Account to the Related Account must
also not exceed $50.
Section VI of the proposed amendment adds six defined terms to that
section. The term Covered Extension of Credit is defined to mean an
indemnification agreement, cross-collateralization agreement or other
grant of a security interest in favor of a financial institution, as
set forth in an Account Opening Agreement between a plan and the
financial institution, which guarantees the payment of debits to (or
by) a Plan Account by (or to) a Related Account. The Department notes
that this definition is intended to provide broad relief for Plan
Accounts that have been subject to a Covered Extension of Credit, and
that remain subject to a Covered Extension of Credit until six months
following the date on which this proposed amendment is adopted. The
scope of the term Covered Loan is narrower. This term is defined in
section VI to mean the lending of money by a Related Account to a Plan
Account, including by means of a debit to the Related Account and a
corresponding credit to the Plan Account, where the Covered Loan is
made pursuant to a Covered Extension of Credit. As such, the term
Covered Loan does not include a loan by a Plan Account to a Related
Account, notwithstanding that such loan may be authorized by an Account
Opening Agreement. A Covered Repayment is defined to mean a repayment
by a Plan Account to a Related Account of a Covered Loan. A Plan
Account is defined to mean an account established with a financial
institution by an employee benefit plan as defined in section 3(3) of
ERISA or a plan as defined in section 4975(e)(1) of the Code. The term
Related Account is defined in section VI to mean an investment account
established with a financial institution by a person or entity, where
such account is subject to an Account Opening Agreement with the
financial institution that also covers a Plan Account and/or guarantees
the payment of debits to the Plan Account. Finally, the term Account
Opening Agreement is defined as a written brokerage, futures or other
investment agreement.
G. Additional Proposed Amendments on the Department's Own Motion
As noted above, PTE 80-26 was most recently amended effective
December 15, 2004. Therein, the Department eliminated a previous
requirement of the exemption that the proceeds of certain loans or
extensions of credit be used only for a period of no more than three
business days. The Department also added two new conditions, conditions
IV(e) and (f). Condition IV(e) provides that: ``[t]he loan is not
described in section 408(b)(3) of ERISA and the regulations promulgated
thereunder (29 CFR 2550.408b-3) or section 4975(d)(3) of the Code and
the regulations promulgated thereunder (26 CFR 54.4975-7(b))[.]''
To clarify that this condition applies equally to extensions of
credit, the Department is proposing to amend condition IV(e) as
follows:
``[t]he loan or other extension of credit is not described in
section 408(b)(3) of ERISA and the regulations promulgated
thereunder (29 CFR 2550.408b-3) or section 4975(d)(3) of the Code
and the regulations promulgated thereunder (26 CFR 54.4975-
7(b))[.]''
Additionally, for consistency, the Department is proposing to
replace the phrase ``loan or extension of credit,'' wherever it is used
in sections of PTE 80-26 that have not expired, with the phrase ``loan
or other extension of credit.''
General Information
The attention of interested persons is directed to the following:
(1) The fact that a transaction is the subject of an exemption
under section 408(a) of ERISA and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code does
not relieve a fiduciary, or other party in interest or disqualified
person with respect to a plan, from certain other provisions of ERISA
and the Code, including any prohibited transaction provisions to which
the exemption does not apply and the general fiduciary responsibility
provisions of section 404 of ERISA which require, among other things,
that a fiduciary act prudently and discharge his or her duties
respecting the plan solely in the interests of the participants and
beneficiaries of the plan. Additionally, the fact that a transaction is
the subject of an exemption does not affect the requirement of section
401(a) of the Code that the plan must operate for the exclusive benefit
of the
[[Page 31589]]
employees of the employer maintaining the plan and their beneficiaries;
(2) This exemption does not currently extend to transactions
prohibited under section 406(b)(1) and (3) of the Act or section
4975(c)(1)(E) or (F) of the Code. If granted, the proposed amendment
would provide limited relief to certain transactions prohibited under
section 406(b)(1) of the Act and section 4975(c)(1)(E) of the Code;
(3) Before an exemption may be granted under section 408(a) of
ERISA and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, the Department must find that
the exemption is administratively feasible, in the interests of the
plan and of its participants and beneficiaries, and protective of the
rights of participants and beneficiaries of the plan;
(4) If granted, the proposed amendment is applicable to a
particular transaction only if the transaction satisfies the conditions
specified in the exemption; and
(5) The proposed amendment, if granted, will be supplemental to,
and not in derogation of, any other provisions of ERISA and the Code,
including statutory or administrative exemptions and transitional
rules. Furthermore, the fact that a transaction is subject to an
administrative or statutory exemption is not dispositive of whether the
transaction is in fact a prohibited transaction.
Written Comments and Hearing Request
The Department invites all interested persons to submit written
comments or requests for a public hearing on the proposed amendment to
the address and within the time period set forth above. All comments
received will be made a part of the record. Comments and requests for a
hearing should state the reasons for the writer's interest in the
proposed exemption. Comments received will be available for public
inspection at the above address.
Proposed Amendment
Under section 408(a) of the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code
and in accordance with the procedures set forth in 29 CFR 2570, Subpart
B (76 FR 66637, 66644, October 27, 2011), the Department proposes to
amend PTE 80-26 as set forth below:
Section I. Retroactive General Exemption
Effective January 1, 1975 until December 14, 2004 the restrictions
of section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section 406(b)(2) of the Act, and
the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code, by reason of
section 4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, shall not apply to the
lending of money or other extension of credit from a party in interest
or disqualified person to an employee benefit plan, nor to the
repayment of such loan or other extension of credit in accordance with
its terms or written modifications thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged to the plan, and no
discount for payment in cash is relinquished by the plan, in connection
with the loan or extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or extension of credit are used only--
(1) for the payment of ordinary operating expenses of the plan,
including the payment of benefits in accordance with the terms of the
plan and periodic premiums under an insurance or annuity contract, or
(2) for a period of no more than three business days, for a purpose
incidental to the ordinary operation of the plan;
(c) The loan or extension of credit is unsecured; and
(d) The loan or extension of credit is not directly or indirectly
made by an employee benefit plan.
Section II: Temporary Exemption
Effective November 1, 1999 through December 31, 2000, the
restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section 406(b)(2) of
the Act, and the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code,
by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, shall not apply
to the lending of money or other extension of credit from a party in
interest or disqualified person to an employee benefit plan, nor to the
repayment of such loan or other extension of credit in accordance with
its terms or written modifications thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged to the plan, and no
discount for payment in cash is relinquished by the plan, in connection
with the loan or extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or extension of credit are used only
for a purpose incidental to the ordinary operation of the plan which
arises in connection with the plan's inability to liquidate, or
otherwise access its assets or access data as a result of a Y2K
problem.
(c) The loan or extension of credit is unsecured;
(d) The loan or extension of credit is not directly or indirectly
made by an employee benefit plan; and
(e) The loan or extension of credit begins on or after November 1,
1999 and is repaid or terminated no later than December 31, 2000.
Section III. September 11, 2001 Market Disruption Exemption
Effective September 11, 2001 through January 9, 2002, the
restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section 406(b)(2) of
the Act, and the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code,
by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, shall not apply
to the lending of money or other extension of credit from a party in
interest or disqualified person to an employee benefit plan, nor to the
repayment of such loan or other extension of credit in accordance with
its terms or written modifications thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged to the plan, and no
discount for payment in cash is relinquished by the plan, in connection
with the loan or extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or extension of credit are used only
for a purpose incidental to the ordinary operation of the plan which
arises in connection with difficulties encountered by the plan in
liquidating, or otherwise accessing its assets, or accessing its data
in a timely manner as a direct or indirect result of the September 11,
2001 disruption;
(c) The loan or extension of credit is unsecured;
(d) The loan or extension of credit is not directly or indirectly
made by an employee benefit plan; and
(e) The loan or extension of credit begins on or after September
11, 2001, and is repaid or terminated no later than January 9, 2002.
Section IV. Prospective General Exemption
Effective as of December 15, 2004, the restrictions of section
406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section 406(b)(2) of the Act, and the taxes
imposed by section 4975(a) and (b) of the Code, by reason of section
4975(c)(1)(B) and (D) of the Code, shall not apply to the lending of
money or other extension of credit from a party in interest or
disqualified person to an employee benefit plan, nor to the repayment
of such loan or other extension of credit in accordance with its terms
or written modifications thereof, if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged to the plan, and no
discount for payment in cash is relinquished by the plan, in connection
with the loan or other extension of credit;
(b) The proceeds of the loan or other extension of credit are used
only--
(1) for the payment of ordinary operating expenses of the plan,
including the payment of benefits in
[[Page 31590]]
accordance with the terms of the plan and periodic premiums under an
insurance or annuity contract, or
(2) for a purpose incidental to the ordinary operation of the plan;
(c) The loan or other extension of credit is unsecured;
(d) The loan or other extension of credit is not directly or
indirectly made by an employee benefit plan;
(e) The loan or other extension of credit is not described in
section 408(b)(3) of ERISA and the regulations promulgated thereunder
(29 CFR 2550.408b-3) or section 4975(d)(3) of the Code and the
regulations promulgated thereunder (26 CFR 54.4975-7(b)); and
(f)(1) Any loan described in section IV(b)(1) that is entered into
on or after April 7, 2006 and that has a term of 60 days or longer must
be made pursuant to a written loan agreement that contains all of the
material terms of such loan;
(2) Any loan described in (b)(2) of this paragraph that is entered
into for a term of 60 days or longer must be made pursuant to a written
loan agreement that contains all of the material terms of such loan.
Section V: Temporary Exemption
The restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(B) and (D) and section
406(b)(1) and (b)(2) of the Act, and the taxes imposed by section
4975(a) and (b) of the Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(B), (D)
and (E) of the Code, shall not apply, from January 1, 1975, until the
date that is six months following the date a final amendment is
published in the Federal Register, to: (1) A Covered Extension of
Credit, as defined in section VI(e); (2) a Covered Loan, as defined in
section VI(f); and (3) a Covered Repayment (as defined in section
VI(g)) if:
(a) No interest or other fee is charged to the plan, and no
discount for payment in cash is relinquished by the plan, in connection
with the Covered Extension of Credit, Covered Loan, or Covered
Repayment;
(b) The Covered Extension of Credit is set forth in an Account
Opening Agreement between a plan and a financial institution, where the
financial institution is subject to oversight by a regulatory agency or
a self-regulatory organization;
(c) The Covered Loan is not directly or indirectly made by a plan;
(d) The Covered Extension of Credit and the Covered Loan are not
described in section 408(b)(3) of ERISA and the regulations promulgated
thereunder (29 CFR 2550.408b-3) or section 4975(d)(3) of the Code and
the regulations promulgated thereunder (26 CFR 54.4975-7(b));
(e) The Covered Loan arose from a lawful cost (including a fee,
expense, investment loss or tax); and
(f) The amount of a Covered Loan from a Related Account to a Plan
Account is no greater than and relates to an amount debited to the Plan
Account in connection with an expense described in paragraph (e) of
this section. The amount of a Covered Repayment of a Covered Loan must
not be greater than the original Covered Loan amount.
Section VI. Definitions
(a) For purposes of section II, a ``Y2K problem'' is a disruption
of computer operations resulting from a computer system's inability to
process data because such system recognizes years only by the last two
digits, causing a ``00'' entry to be read as the year ``1900'' rather
than the year ``2000.''
(b) For purposes of section III, the ``September 11, 2001
disruption'' is the disruption to the United States financial and
securities markets and/or the operation of persons providing
administrative services to employee benefit plans, resulting from the
acts of terrorism that occurred on September 11, 2001;
(c) For purposes of this exemption, the terms ``employee benefit
plan'' and ``plan'' refer to an employee benefit plan described in
ERISA section 3(3) and/or a plan described in section 4975(e)(1) of the
Code;
(d) For purposes of section V, the term ``Plan Account'' means an
account established with a financial institution by an employee benefit
plan described in section 3(3) of ERISA or a plan described in section
4975(e)(1) of the Code.
(e) For purposes of section V, the term ``Covered Extension of
Credit'' means an indemnification agreement, cross-collateralization
agreement or other grant of a security interest in favor of a financial
institution, as set forth in an Account Opening Agreement between a
plan and the financial institution, which guarantees the payment of
debits to (or by) a Plan Account by (or to) a Related Account, but does
not include a loan or payment under such agreement or security
interest;
(f) For purposes of section V, the term ``Covered Loan'' means a
loan to a Plan Account by a Related Account, including by means of a
debit to a Related Account and a corresponding credit to the Plan
Account, where the Covered Loan is made pursuant to a Covered Extension
of Credit;
(g) For purposes of section V, the term ``Covered Repayment'' means
the repayment by a Plan Account to a Related Account of a Covered Loan.
(h) For purposes of section V, the term ``Related Account'' means
an investment account established with a financial institution by a
person or entity, where such account is subject to an Account Opening
Agreement with the financial institution that also covers a Plan
Account and/or guarantees the payment of debits to the Plan Account.
(i) For purposes of section V, the term ``Account Opening
Agreement'' means a written brokerage, futures or other investment
agreement.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 20th day of May, 2013.
Lyssa E. Hall,
Director, Office of Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits
Security Administration, U. S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2013-12362 Filed 5-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-29-P