vimarsana.com

Page 2 - ப்ரிந்ஸிபல் வாழ்க்கை காப்பீடு இணை News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Judge Finds in Favor of Principal Life s Process for Setting GIC Crediting Rate

Judge Finds in Favor of Principal Life’s Process for Setting GIC Crediting Rate Principal prevailed in a lawsuit that alleged it set the crediting rate for a guaranteed investment contract (GIC) such that it could “retain unreasonably large and/or excessive profits.” Following a six-day trial, Judge John A. Jarvey of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa ruled in favor of Principal Life Insurance Co. in a lawsuit alleging it violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) by setting the crediting rate for a guaranteed investment contract (GIC) such that it could “retain unreasonably large and/or excessive profits.” A GIC is a stable value investment contract issued by an insurance company that usually pays a specified rate of return for a specific period of time, guaranteeing principal and accumulated interest.

Judge Sides With Principal Life Insurance in GIC Lawsuit

Judge Sides With Principal Life Insurance in GIC Lawsuit A federal judge found Principal’s ‘meticulous’ process for setting the GIC’s composite crediting rate protected the availability of the investment and was in the best interest of participants. Reported by Following a six-day trial, Judge John A. Jarvey of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa ruled in favor of Principal Life Insurance Co. in a lawsuit alleging it violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) by setting the crediting rate for a guaranteed investment contract (GIC) such that it could “retain unreasonably large and/or excessive profits.” A GIC is a stable value investment contract issued by an insurance company that usually pays a specified rate of return for a specific period of time, guaranteeing principal and accumulated interest.

Courts weigh in on participant data under ERISA | Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

Divane v. Northwestern University, No. 16 C 8157 (N.D. Ill. May 25, 2018), aff d, 953 F.3d 980 (7th Cir. 2020), the district court first rejected plaintiff’s claim that the plan sponsor breached its fiduciary duty by allowing the recordkeeper access to participant data – which plainly is necessary to the recordkeeping function – and allowing the recordkeeper to use it for cross-selling. It then agreed with the plan sponsor’s argument that allowing the recordkeeper’s use of that data could not constitute an ERISA prohibited transaction because that data, while potentially of economic value to the recordkeeper, was not a plan asset under “ordinary notions of property rights,” the touchstone under the ERISA plan asset regulation.

© 2025 Vimarsana

vimarsana © 2020. All Rights Reserved.