Source: https://benefitslink.com/cgi-bin/events/index.cgi?rm=event&id=56767
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 10:29:38+00:00

Document:
Controlled Group Liability and Successor Employer Rules After PBGC v. Findlay Industries Inc.
This CLE webinar will provide benefits counsel, advisers and plan administrators guidance on the requirements and limitations of the controlled group liability and successor employer rules under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). The panel will provide an analysis of key provisions under ERISA and the IRC impacting controlled group and successor liability, guidance from recent cases, and methods to limit claims and reduce the risk of seller's liability.
Pension funding obligations are not limited to the immediate employer and sponsor of a pension plan. Third parties can now have pension liability as members of a controlled group or as a successor in an asset deal. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit’s decision in PBGC v. Findlay Industries Inc. and a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Heavenly Hana Hotels v. Hotel Union & Hotel Industry of Hawaii Pension Plan, confirm that this liability exposure may exist where you least expect it. Employers, investors, shareholders, and lenders must carefully analyze the controlled group liability and successor employer rules under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and effectively implement strategies to minimize the dangers of pension liability.
ERISA provides that employees of a "trade or business" under the common control with another entity are treated as if they are employed by a single employer resulting in joint and several liability when the single-employer pension plan is terminated or an entity withdraws from a multiemployer pension plan.
In addition to controlled group liability, courts have imposed successor liability on a buyer in an asset deal where the buyer had actual or even constructive notice of the pension plan liabilities before the sale and continues the operations of the seller. The majority of those cases have involved actions by multi-employer pension plans to collect withdrawal liability from unrelated third parties. This analysis of successor liability could also become more prevalent in the single-employer plan context.
Listen as our panel discusses the impact of the Sixth Circuit's decision in PBGC v. Findlay Industries Inc., et al., essential rules under ERISA and the IRC for controlled group and successor liability, and methods to limit claims and reduce the risk of liability.
The impact of the Sixth Circuit's decision in PBGC v. Findlay Industries Inc., and other significant cases.
Controlled group liability litigation claims by multi-employer plans and the PBGC, including claims against entities outside the U.S.
Determining what constitutes a "controlled group" and "trades or businesses" after PBGC v. Findlay Industries Inc., et al.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.