Supreme Court Weighs Intel 401(k) Suit Over Benchmark Rule for 1 Retirement Plan
Updated
Updated · SCOTUSblog · Oct 2
Supreme Court Weighs Intel 401(k) Suit Over Benchmark Rule for 1 Retirement Plan
3 articles · Updated · SCOTUSblog · Oct 2
Summary
Next week’s argument in Anderson v. Intel asks whether workers alleging imprudent retirement investing must identify a meaningful benchmark, not just say their funds lagged alternatives.
Intel’s plan fiduciaries put retirement money heavily into hedge funds and private equity, and employees say that mix produced weak returns that breached ERISA’s duty of prudence.
Lower courts threw out the suit because the complaint did not compare Intel’s funds with similarly risk-managed funds, accepting Intel’s view that prudence turns on process rather than raw performance.
The case could shape how easily employees can challenge defined-contribution plan investments under ERISA, balancing flexible pleading standards against employers’ warnings about costly discovery.
Are strict legal benchmarks protecting companies from frivolous lawsuits, or secretly allowing them to gamble your retirement funds without accountability?
If your employer's risky 401(k) bets fail, could a new Supreme Court ruling block you from ever suing to recover your life savings?