A California court has ruled that an arbitrator (not a judge) should decide on the applicability of California Labor Code Section 925 to a dispute between a law firm partner and his former law firm. Zhang v. Superior Court,...more
On January 19, 2021 the Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) and the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) published in the Federal Register Final Regulations (the “Final Regulations”) interpreting the excise tax under Section...more
2/3/2021
/ Compensation & Benefits ,
Deferred Compensation ,
Excise Tax ,
Executive Compensation ,
Final Rules ,
Interim Guidance ,
IRS ,
Remuneration ,
Tax Exempt Entities ,
Tax Exemptions ,
Tax Planning
Terminating a CEO “for cause” requires that the board of directors (“Board”) of the employer focus on two questions – What is the applicable standard for cause? Do the facts and circumstances satisfy this applicable...more
8/21/2020
/ CEOs ,
Executive Compensation ,
Foreign Private Issuers ,
Fraud ,
Gross Negligence ,
Internal Investigations ,
Publicly-Traded Companies ,
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ,
Senior Managers ,
Shareholder Litigation ,
Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) ,
Termination
Proposed Regulations under Section 4960 of the Internal Revenue Code provide important guidance for tax-exempt organizations and their affiliates regarding an excise tax on certain executive compensation. The U.S. Department...more
7/29/2020
/ Compensation & Benefits ,
Covered Employees ,
Excise Tax ,
Executive Compensation ,
Grandfathering Rules ,
Independent Contractors ,
Internal Revenue Code (IRC) ,
IRS ,
Proposed Regulation ,
Remuneration ,
Tax Exempt Entities ,
Tax Exemptions ,
Tax Reform
We continue our blog series on COVID-19 implications on executive compensation matters with a post that addresses considerations relating to amending performance goals under equity and other incentive awards.
Setting...more
Editor’s Overview -
Of course, on the top of everyone’s minds these days is COVID-19. In this edition of Proskauer’s ERISA Newsletter, our colleagues discuss some of the legislation and guidance that has been issued over...more
On March 27, 2020, the President signed into law the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”) (H.R. 748).
In this blog post we (1) lay out an initial action plan for employers considering...more
We continue our blog series on COVID-19 implications on executive compensation matters with a post that addresses salary or wage reductions on a company-wide or targeted basis.
Companies impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic,...more
COVID-19 has had significant impacts on all aspects of business. While employers are assessing how to handle immediate employee needs related to sick leave, family leave and benefits claims, employers should also consider...more
In this edition of our Newsletter, we take a look at a pair of cases that, while unrelated, together remind us of the importance of having clear plan rules in place that reflect the plan sponsor’s intention. The first article...more
10/11/2019
/ 401k ,
403(b) Plans ,
Affordable Care Act ,
Benefit Plan Sponsors ,
Breach of Duty ,
Class Action ,
Employee Benefits ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Employer Group Health Plans ,
Fiduciary Duty ,
Foreign Nationals ,
Hardship Distributions ,
Health Insurance ,
IRS ,
Mental Health Parity Rule ,
Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act (MPPAA) ,
Pensions ,
Retirement Plan ,
Safe Harbors ,
Standing ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Withdrawal Liability
On Thursday, September 12th, the California State Assembly passed Assembly Bill 5 (“AB 5”), the controversial new law that codifies the three-factor “ABC” test introduced by the California Supreme Court in its 2018 Dynamex...more
9/16/2019
/ ABC Test ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Dynamex ,
Employee Definition ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Gig Economy ,
Governor Newsom ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Independent Contractors ,
Misclassification ,
State Labor Laws