- 17 -
administered. See Winger's Depart. Store, Inc. v. Commissioner,
supra at 887-888.
We previously have held that the standards for fiduciary
behavior set forth in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974 (ERISA), Pub. L. 93-406, sec. 404(a)(1), 88 Stat. 877,
current version at 29 U.S.C. sec. 1104 (1994), may be used to
help determine whether the exclusive benefit rule has been
violated. See Ada Orthopedic, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1994-606; see also Calfee, Halter & Griswold v. Commissioner, 88
T.C. 641, 652 (1987) ("the standards of title I and title II [of
ERISA] were closely coordinated by Congress specifically to
develop a unified set of rules"). ERISA section 404(a)(1)
requires a plan fiduciary to discharge his or her duties for the
exclusive purpose of (1) providing benefits to participants and
their beneficiaries and (2) defraying reasonable expenses of
administering the plan. Additionally, the fiduciary must (1)
perform those duties with the care, skill, prudence, and
diligence under the circumstances then prevailing that a prudent
investor acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters
would use in the conduct of an enterprise of a like character and
with like aims, (2) diversify investments to minimize the risk of
large losses, unless diversification clearly is not prudent under
the circumstances, and (3) discharge those duties in accordance
with the documents and instruments governing the plan to the
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011