The IRS proposed the first comprehensive update to the section 430 minimum-funding regulations in years, finally implementing amendments from WRERA, SECURE, and SECURE 2.0. The substantive changes actuaries will care about: investment management expenses are excluded from target normal cost, with a $5,000 threshold mirroring Schedule C itemization; plans adopted after year-end but before the return due date count as adopted on the last day of the year for funding purposes; and benefit-increasing amendments adopted after the valuation date can enter the funding math if they pass a new disproportionality test. Comments are due October 19, and the rules would apply to plan years beginning six months after finalization, with earlier reliance permitted.

The Departments posted a statement confirming that the Fifth Circuit's August 11 en banc decision in Texas Medical Association v. HHS affirmed portions of a district court judgment striking certain regulations and guidance on how the qualifying payment amount is calculated. The Departments say they are reviewing the opinion and anticipate issuing guidance shortly, and that the Federal IDR process remains operational. Until that guidance issues, the QPA methodology the rules prescribed has no replacement.

In a published opinion, the Sixth Circuit held that ERISA preempts out-of-network providers' negligent misrepresentation and promissory estoppel claims based on a plan administrator's oral assurances about reimbursement, affirming dismissal of a suit that sought UCR-rate payment from La-Z-Boy's health plan after Blue Cross allegedly promised it by phone. The panel applied its Cromwell precedent, and Judge Murphy concurred separately to note most circuits allow some misrepresentation claims against administrators. The same week, the Ninth Circuit went the other way on a nearly identical negligent misrepresentation claim in Healthcare Ally v. WSP USA.

In a published opinion by Judge Berzon, the Ninth Circuit held that ERISA does not preempt an out-of-network surgery center's negligent misrepresentation claim over a benefit-verification call in which Aetna said reimbursement would run at the UCR rate, then paid roughly five percent of the bill at the Medicare rate. The provider's injury is its own, not a derivative claim for plan benefits, and letting administrators misstate coverage to providers with impunity would undercut ERISA's purposes. The court still affirmed dismissal of the companion promissory estoppel claim as preempted, and the panel's line falls almost exactly where the Sixth Circuit refused to draw one eight days later in La-Z-Boy.

Rosenbaum reframes the dreaded participant complaint as an early-warning system: a missing contribution or access problem surfaced by a participant is a fix-it-now opportunity before it becomes a DOL inquiry or a claim.

Allianz finds 72 percent of parents saving for retirement are confident in reaching their goals against 54 percent of adults without children, a gap the study attributes to structure and planning habits.

Eversheds Sutherland works through the August 11 proposed regulations on Trump Account employer contribution programs and the parallel DCAP nondiscrimination rules, a law-firm companion to the consultant takes already in this run.

ARA's read of the Gusto payroll data covered here Wednesday: small-business plan offering up from 19 to 31 percent since 2019, led by industries and hourly workforces that historically went without.

The Slott Report maps the fork in the road between Roth IRA and Roth 401(k) distribution rules, a useful desk reference as mandatory Roth catch-ups push more plan money into Roth accounts.

Aon's Compliance and Policy Consulting team digs into the DCAP half of the August 11 proposed regulations: clarified nondiscrimination testing that should raise passing rates, especially on the average benefits test, where only employees actually contributing are counted and workers earning under $25,000 may be excluded. Employers may rely on the proposed rules for 2026 plan-year testing now. Comments are due September 25, with a public hearing set for October 15.

The number behind the EBRI release covered here Wednesday: average HSA balances hit a record $5,532, while just 18 percent of accountholders invest any assets outside cash.

PLANSPONSOR's angle on the same EBRI study: HSAs are being used as spending accounts, with only 18 percent of participants investing beyond cash.

A California federal court awarded an ERISA disability claimant every dollar of a $227,348 fee request, rejecting the insurer's demand for a 90 percent across-the-board cut despite only partial success on the merits. Roberts walks through the Hummell factors and the lodestar math in a dispute that turned on how covered earnings were calculated.

The trade press catches up to Johnson v. Russell Investment Management, Tuesday's lead here: plaintiffs do not always need an apples-to-apples benchmark to plead imprudence.

ARA situates Johnson in the meaningful-benchmark line that has decided so many recent prudence cases: the Eleventh Circuit's answer is that not every claim needs one, a counterweight to this month's dismissals in Scholin and Hodges.

Kantor & Kantor's weekly survey leads with Healthcare Ally v. WSP USA, where the Ninth Circuit held a provider's negligent misrepresentation claim over a benefit-verification call is not ERISA-preempted. The same edition rounds up a strong week elsewhere, including an Arizona ruling that splits 401(k) forfeiture decisions into settlor plan-drafting and fiduciary allocation choices while dismissing the complaint with leave to amend, and the Seventh Circuit's Alcoa ruling covered here Monday and Tuesday.

In Pedersen v. Kinder Morgan, a Texas federal court granted reformation for a class whose summary plan description failed to disclose a formula that cut a promised 2 percent pension accrual to as little as 1.33 percent, holding per Kantor & Kantor's account that proof of intent to defraud is not required. The court pointed to more than $100 million in employer savings as the unfair advantage supporting the remedy, but ordered individualized relief rather than a blanket award. Another decision, after Cohen and Buckmann's SPD warning Monday, that what a summary omits can be its most expensive feature.

A Massachusetts federal judge vacated the marketplace rule's restriction on coverage of gender-affirming care while upholding several other ACA rollback provisions. A marketplace-side ruling, but one carriers and multi-state plans will be tracking.

The fifth installment of the firm's executive-pay series covers the contractual frame from hiring through departure: employment agreements, severance design, and the Dodd-Frank clawback rules now binding on all listed companies.