B P A S P A R T N E R C O N F E R E N C E 2 0 1 6

Considering MEPs and METsBrian NicholsonSenior Sales Relationship Manager, BPAS Plan Administration & Recordkeeping Services

B P A S P A R T N E R C O N F E R E N C E 2 0 1 6

How We Can Help

Servicing Considerations

Pro’s and Con’s

How They Compare

The MEP & MET

Agenda

Multiple Employer Plans

A retirement plan adopted by two or more employers who

are unrelated (not members of a controlled group or affiliated service group). There are two types of MEPs……Closed and

Open.

MEPs

Multiple Employer Plans

Considered one Plan under

ERISA, share one plan document, but have many participating employers.

Closed MEPs: MEPs whose participating employers share a nexus or common bond (not a control group), such as with an Association or Professional Employer Organization (“PEO”).

ParticipatingEmployers

Open MEPs: MEPs whose participating employers cannot demonstrate a sufficient commonality (could include virtually any employer).

Multiple Employer Plans

METs - Assets of separate retirement plans are combined into a single Trust. Plans in an MET remain separate and distinct, with independent plan documents.

Single Group Trust

ParticipatingEmployers

Multiple Employer Trusts

Closed MEP Open MEP MET

How They Compare

One filing for the MEP

Single Plan Document

Relief from selecting and monitoring

investments

When buying investments & other Plan

Services

Testing required for

each ER

Individual filing for each ER? One filing for the MEP?

Single Plan Document

Relief from selecting and monitoring

investments

When buying investments & other Plan

Services

Testing required for

each ER

Individual filings for

each ER; one for the MET

Each ER has separate

document

Relief from selecting and monitoring

investments

When buying investments

Closed MEP

Open MEP

MET

DocumentTesting

Testing required for

each ER

Reporting & Disclosure

FiduciaryProtection Cost Savings

Yep

Nope

Nope

Nexus Required?

How They Compare

Same across all ER’s

Same across all ER’s

May be different from

ER to ER

Cost Structure

• Lower costs• Reduction in Fiduciary responsibility• Increased level of Governance• Improves ER access to retirement plans

Pro’s

• Can be complex• Limited flexibility w/investment selection (for

each ER) • Limited flexibility in Plan Design (MEP’S)• “One bad apple”?? (MEP’s)

Con’s

Pro’s and Con’s

Pro’s

Con’s

Servicing Considerations

• Discretionary• Non-DiscretionaryInvestment Advisory

• Education • Advice• Outsource??

Participant Services

• Monitoring of Service ProvidersOversight

What Roles Will You Play?

Investment Advisory

Participant Services

Oversight

Servicing Considerations

• Meetings with Sponsors/Lead ER In Person?• Meetings via webinar or other technology?For Investment Advisory….

• “Boots on the ground”?• Technology based?• Both?

For Participant Education….

• Will this be provided?• By you, or outsourced?For Participant Advice….

What’s Your Service Model?

For Investment Advisory….

For Participant Education….

For Participant Advice….

Servicing Considerations

• Payroll Companies• PEO’s• Associations

Partnerships or Alliances….

• You? • The Lead ER (PEO, Association, etc.)?• A Partner (e.g. payroll provider)?

Who’s Marketing?

• Will depend on Plan type • Plan size and participantsWhat’s the Target Market?

What’s The Marketing Strategy?

Partnerships or Alliances….

Who’s Marketing?

What’s the Target Market?

Servicing Considerations

• Depends on your service model• Internal Resources…and time• Your Partners

How much can you support?

What’s Your “Bandwidth”?

Other things to Consider?

How much can you support?

How BPAS Can Help

Payr

oll I

nteg

ratio

nExperience

Ptp Advice

Tech

nolo

gy

Fiduciary Services

Features & Support

B P A S P A R T N E R C O N F E R E N C E 2 0 1 6

BPAS PARTNER CONFERENCE 2016

#BPASPC