This quest for clarity has forged an unusual alliance, bringing together groups with divergent perspectives on the rules and their contents. It includes a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general, the ERISA Industry Committee, representing large employers, and the American Benefits Council.
In a joint comment letter, Democratic AGs appeal to the tri-agencies to provide “an example of a compliant comparative analysis,” stressing that the proposed rules, while outlining a “clear six-step process for NQTL comparative analyses,” lack the necessary details.
Theme In Parity Rule Comments: Request for a Guiding Light
Sarah Bassler Millar, a partner at Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, emphasizes the critical need for “an actual example of what a compliant comparative analysis looks like.” She underscores that state enforcement agencies and plan sponsors all yearn for a guiding light, a crystal-clear example to navigate these treacherous waters.
Michelle Grant, a partner in Dorsey & Whitney LLP’s health litigation practice, underscores the urgency for clearer regulations amid the persistent disagreements about whether the proposed rules provide the needed clarity.
Threats of Legal Battles Loom
Amidst the chaos, threats of impending legal battles loom ominously. Industry groups, including ERIC, warn of potential legal action if the regulations are finalized without significant changes.
