U.S. Code » Title 29 » Chapter CHAPTER 18— EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT INCOME SECURITY PROGRAM › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER III— PLAN TERMINATION INSURANCE › Subtitle Subtitle E— Special Provisions for Multiemployer Plans › Part part 5— benefits after termination

29 U.S.C. § 1441

Benefits under certain terminated plans

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 29 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Amendment of plan by plan sponsor to reduce benefits, and suspension of benefit payments

Notwithstanding sections 1053 and 1054 of this title, the plan sponsor of a terminated multiemployer plan to which section 1341a(d) of this title applies shall amend the plan to reduce benefits, and shall suspend benefit payments, as required by this section.

(b) Determinations respecting value of nonforfeitable benefits under terminated plan and value of assets of plan(1) The value of nonforfeitable benefits under a terminated plan referred to in subsection (a), and the value of the plan’s assets, shall be determined in writing, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the corporation, as of the end of the plan year during which section 1341a(d) of this title becomes applicable to the plan, and each plan year thereafter.(2) For purposes of this section, plan assets include outstanding claims for withdrawal liability (within the meaning of section 1301(a)(12) of this title).(c) Amendment of plan by plan sponsor to reduce benefits for conservation of assets; factors applicable(1) If, according to the determination made under subsection (b), the value of nonforfeitable benefits exceeds the value of the plan’s assets, the plan sponsor shall amend the plan to reduce benefits under the plan to the extent necessary to ensure that the plan’s assets are sufficient, as determined and certified in accordance with regulations prescribed by the corporation, to discharge when due all of the plan’s obligations with respect to nonforfeitable benefits.(2) Any plan amendment required by this subsection shall, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury—(A) reduce benefits only to the extent necessary to comply with paragraph (1);(B) reduce accrued benefits only to the extent that those benefits are not eligible for the corporation’s guarantee under section 1322a(b) of this title;(C) comply with the rules for and limitations on benefit reductions under a plan in reorganization, as prescribed in section 1425 11 See References in Text note below. of this title, except to the extent that the corporation prescribes other rules and limitations in regulations under this section; and(D) take effect no later than 6 months after the end of the plan year for which it is determined that the value of nonforfeitable benefits exceeds the value of the plan’s assets.(d) Suspension of benefit payments; determinative factors; powers and duties of plan sponsor; retroactive benefit payments(1) In any case in which benefit payments under a plan which is insolvent under paragraph (2)(A) exceed the resource benefit level, any such payments which are not basic benefits shall be suspended, in accordance with this subsection, to the extent necessary to reduce the sum of such payments and such basic benefits to the greater of the resource benefit level or the level of basic benefits, unless an alternative procedure is prescribed by the corporation in connection with a supplemental guarantee program established under section 1322a(g)(2) of this title.(2) For purposes of this subsection, for a plan year—(A) a plan is insolvent if—(i) the plan has been amended to reduce benefits to the extent permitted by subsection (c), and(ii) the plan’s available resources are not sufficient to pay benefits under the plan when due for the plan year; and(B) “resource benefit level” and “available resources” have the meanings set forth in paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively, of section 1426(b) of this title.(3) The plan sponsor of a plan which is insolvent (within the meaning of paragraph (2)(A)) shall have the powers and duties of the plan sponsor of a plan in reorganization which is insolvent (within the meaning of section 1426(b)(1) of this title), except that regulations governing the plan sponsor’s exercise of those powers and duties under this section shall be prescribed by the corporation, and the corporation shall prescribe by regulation notice requirements which assure that plan participants and beneficiaries receive adequate notice of benefit suspensions.(4) A plan is not required to make retroactive benefit payments with respect to that portion of a benefit which was suspended under this subsection, except that the provisions of section 1426(c)(4) and (5) of this title shall apply in the case of plans which are insolvent under paragraph (2)(A), in connection with the plan year during which such section 1341a(d) of this title first became applicable to the plan and every year thereafter, in the same manner and to the same extent as such provisions apply to insolvent plans in reorganization under section 1426 of this title, in connection with insolvency years under such section 1426 of this title.(Pub. L. 93–406, title IV, § 4281, as added Pub. L. 96–364, title I, § 104(2), Sept. 26, 1980, 94 Stat. 1261.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 1425 of this title, referred to in subsec. (c)(2)(C), was repealed by Pub. L. 113–235, div. O, title I, § 108(a)(1), Dec. 16, 2014, 128 Stat. 2786.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Part effective Sept. 26, 1980, except as specifically provided, see section 1461(e) of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case: Cent. Laborers' Pension Fund v. Heinz, 541 U.S. 739 (2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cent. Laborers' Pension Fund v. Heinz, 541 U.S. 739 (2004). · cites it 2× “[3] "A plan shall be treated as not satisfying the requirements of this section if the accrued benefit of a participant is decreased by an amendment of the plan, other than an amendment described in section 412(c)(8) [of this Code], or [ 29 U.S.C. § 1441 ]." 26 U.S.C. § 411…”
Thomas E. Heinz & Richard J. Schmitt, Jr. v. Cent. Laborers' Pension Fund, 303 F.3d 802 (7th Cir. 2002). · cites it 3× “3d at 288 -89 (citing 29 U.S.C. §§ 1441 (a), 1341a(d) & 1342(d)(l)(A)(v); 29 C.”
Boring v. Google Inc., 362 F. App'x 273 (3rd Cir. 2010). “Google timely removed the action to the District Court pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §§ 1441 and 1446. The District Court exercised diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.”
Daniel A. Spacek v. The Mar. Ass'n, I L a Pension Plan, & Trs. of the Agreement of Trust, 134 F.3d 283 (5th Cir. 1998). “” 29 U.S.C. § 1441 (a) (emphasis added). Section 1341a(d) instructs that “[t]he plan sponsor of a plan which terminates under .”
Bland v. Freightliner LLC, 206 F. Supp. 2d 1202 (M.D. Fla. 2002). “As a result of the Congressional amendment to 29 U.S.C. § 1441 , derivative jurisdiction is no longer a tool which federal litigants may use to transfer cases to alternative venues.”
Cross Country Bank v. McGraw, 321 F. Supp. 2d 816 (S.D.W. Va 2004). “§ 1441 (c), which provides: Whenever a separate and independent claim or cause of action within the jurisdiction conferred by section 1331 of this title is joined with one or more otherwise non-removable claims or causes or action, the entire case may be removed and the district…”
Pierce v. Parker Towing Co., 25 F. Supp. 3d 1372 (S.D. Ala. 2014). “29 U.S.C. § 1441 was amended as part of the Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act of 2011, § 105, Pub.”
Conway v. Boston Edison Co., 745 F. Supp. 773 (D. Mass. 1990). “Jurisdiction over State Claims I am authorized by 29 U.S.C. § 1441 (c) to entertain the remaining claims in this action or, in my discretion, to remand them.”
Donna L. Nichols v. Bd. of Trs. of the Asbestos Workers Local 24 Pension Plan, 835 F.2d 881 (D.C. Cir. 1987). “2085 (1986) (codified in Titles 16, 19, 25, 26, 28, 29, 42, 46, and 49 of U.”
In Re Alagna, 107 B.R. 301 (Bankr.D. Colo. 1989). “It is thus preempted by ERISA “insofar as it may now or hereafter re late to any employee benefit plan covered by the statute” (emphasis added), 29 U.S.C. § 1441 (a), i.e., only as to its reference to ERISA.”
Battoni v. IBEW Local Union No. 102 Emp. Pension Plan, 594 F.3d 230 (3rd Cir. 2010). “§ 1082 (d)(2), and 4281, 29 U.S.C. § 1441 , do not apply in this case.”
Henry J. Ellender Heirs, LLC v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 42 F. Supp. 3d 812 (E.D. La. 2014). “The Plaintiff argues that Badger’s theory would extend OCSLA coverage to “virtually any issue involving the United States’ oil and gas industry infrastructure” including “explosions involving land-based storage facilities, pipelines, refineries, and even gas stations .”
Show all 46 citing cases →
— 29 U.S.C. § 1441(a) — 1 case
Caulley v. Interprise/Sw. Interior & Space Design Inc (N.D. Tex. 2021).
— 29 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2) — 1 case
Elling v. Mesa Biotech, Inc. (D.N.M. 2019).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.