Justin Alex

1 month ago | mondaq.com | Justin Alex |Neil Shah

We recently reported on a district court decision holding that theCentral States Pension Fund's calculation of withdrawalliability should not have included contribution rate increasesimposed after the Fund's implementation of a rehabilitationplan. In Central States, S.E. & S.W. Pension Fund v. EventMedia Inc., Nos. 24-1739 & 1740-42, 2025 WL 1185368 (7thCir. Apr. 24, 2025), the Seventh Circuit affirmed two priordistrict court rulings that had reached the same conclusion.

1 month ago | jdsupra.com | Justin Alex |Neil Shah

We recently reported on a district court decision holding that the Central States Pension Fund’s calculation of withdrawal liability should not have included contribution rate increases imposed after the Fund’s implementation of a rehabilitation plan. In Central States, S.E. & S.W. Pension Fund v. Event Media Inc., Nos. 24-1739 & 1740-42, 2025 WL 1185368 (7th Cir. Apr. 24, 2025), the Seventh Circuit affirmed two prior district court rulings that had reached the same conclusion.

Feb 14, 2025 | mondaq.com | Justin Alex |Neil Shah

In Central States, S.E. & S.W. Pension Fund v. McKessonCorp., No. 23-cv-16770, 2025 WL 81358 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 13,2025), the district court affirmed that a multiemployer pensionplan's calculation of withdrawal liability should not haveincluded contribution rate increases imposed after the plan hadimplemented a rehabilitation plan. An employer that withdraws from a multiemployer pension plan isgenerally liable for its proportionate share of the plan'sunfunded vested benefits.

Feb 12, 2025 | jdsupra.com | Justin Alex |Neil Shah

In Central States, S.E. & S.W. Pension Fund v. McKesson Corp., No. 23-cv-16770, 2025 WL 81358 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 13, 2025), the district court affirmed that a multiemployer pension plan’s calculation of withdrawal liability should not have included contribution rate increases imposed after the plan had implemented a rehabilitation plan. An employer that withdraws from a multiemployer pension plan is generally liable for its proportionate share of the plan’s unfunded vested benefits.

Jan 17, 2025 | natlawreview.com | Justin Alex

As described in further detail below, absent Congressional action, plan sponsors should take note that PBGC premium filings will generally be due one month earlier than usual for plan years beginning in 2025. This modification only applies for 2025. Under ERISA Section 4007, the PBGC determines when premium filings—the submission of required data and payment of any required premiums for PBGC-insured plans—are due.