Pooled Registered Pension Plans - Federal Government Takes Next Step

The federal government followed up on its promise in this year’s budget to implement pooled registered pension plans (PRPPs) “as soon as possible”, with the release of a consultation paper (the Paper) that considers the potential tax rules for PRPPs. The Paper seeks feedback on a number of issues, many of which arise as a result of a key difference between a regular defined contribution pension plan and a PRPP -- being that self-employed individuals and employees of non-participating employers may contribute to the latter.

Continue Reading...

Lump Sum Payments in Lieu of Health/Dental Benefits Will Be Taxable

Employers considering payouts in lieu of health and dental benefits should move quickly, as the Canada Revenue Agency (the CRA) has indicated that (subject to certain exceptions for insolvent employers) such payments will be taxable beginning in 2012.

In response to commentary included in the federal budget, the CRA recently posted a series of Qs & As clarifying its administration of the rules regarding the tax treatment of lump sum amounts received in lieu of health and dental coverage. In the past, the CRA had taken the position that lump sum amounts received by retirees or employees upon cancellation of their private health coverage could be considered “advance reimbursements of medical expenses” and, as a result, not taxable when received. Upon reconsideration, the CRA has changed its position and concluded that such amounts are in fact taxable when received.

The CRA is providing advance notice of this change in position, by allowing these lump sum payments to continue on a tax-free basis until 2012. However, where the payments are in relation to an employer’s insolvency that arose prior to 2012, the payment eventually made to any retirees or former employees would not be subject to CRA’s new position on taxability even if it is made in 2012 or later.

Further details regarding reporting and withholding requirements are included in the CRA Qs & As.

Do Your Plan Communications Mislead Participants? The United States Supreme Court Explains Their Remedies

Plan fiduciaries and ERISA litigators got a few surprises in a recent United States Supreme Court decision on whether participants can be awarded benefits promised to them in plan communications, but not in the plan document.

The decision, CIGNA v. Amara, has been described as a victory for plan sponsors by defense counsel and as a win for participants by plaintiffs' counsel, but that may simply mean that while CIGNA won the battle when the lower court decision against it was overturned, careless fiduciaries (and even CIGNA) may have lost the war. The big issue was whether participants needed to show detrimental reliance on the communications that promised greater benefits than the plan, including that they had actually read the communications. The Supreme Court's answer was "not always".

Continue Reading...