Wagner Logo

Follow us on Twitter View our profile on LinkedIn Like us on Facebook 




The Wagner Law Group

The Wagner Law Group is a nationally recognized practice in the areas of ERISA and employee benefits, estate planning, employment, labor and human resources and investment management.


Established in 1996, The Wagner Law Group is dedicated to the highest standards of integrity, excellence and thought leadership and is considered to be amongst the nation's premier ERISA and employee benefits law firms. The firm has six offices across the country, providing unparalleled legal advice to its clients, including large, small and nonprofit corporations as well as individuals and government entities worldwide. The Wagner Law Group's 28 attorneys, senior benefits consultant and three paralegals combine many years of experience in their fields of practice with a variety of backgrounds. Seven of the attorneys are AV-rated by Martindale-Hubbell and six are Fellows of the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel, an invitation-only organization of nationally recognized employee benefits lawyers.  Seven of the firm's attorneys have been named to the prestigious Super Lawyers list for 2016, which highlights outstanding lawyers based on a rigorous selection process.




Contact Info

The Wagner Law Group


  Integrity | Excellence



Tel: (617) 357-5200 

Fax: (617) 357-5250 

99 Summer Street 

13th Floor

Boston, MA 02110


Washington, D.C.

Tel: (202) 969-2800


Fax: (202) 969-2568

 800 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Suite 810

Washington, D.C. 20006


Palm Beach Gardens 

Tel: (561) 293-3590
Fax: (561) 293-3591
7108 Fairway Drive
Suite 125
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33418



Tel: (813) 603-2959

Fax: (813) 603-2961

101 East Kennedy Boulevard

Suite 2140
Tampa, FL  33602 


San Francisco

Tel: (415) 625-0002

Fax: (415) 358-8300

300 Montgomery Street

Suite 600

San Francisco, CA 94104


St. Louis

Tel: (314) 236-0065

Fax: (314) 236-5743
25 W. Moody Avenue
St. Louis, MO  63119 








Recently-Enacted State-Level Legislation Imposes New Obligations on Financial Institutions, Investment Advisers and Service Providers to 403(b) Plans



July 10, 2017




Legislation recently enacted by two states obligates financial institutions and investment advisers, as well as service providers to non-ERISA 403(b) plans, to meet new compliance requirements. Specifically, Nevada has enacted legislation that imposes a fiduciary duty on financial institutions and investment advisers rendering investment advice to Nevada-based clients. Similarly, the Connecticut legislature has passed a bill requiring service providers for 403(b) plans not covered by ERISA to disclose conflicts-of-interest to a plan's fiduciaries.


Nevada legislation. Financial institutions and investment advisers operating in Nevada recently became subject to a new state-imposed fiduciary duty. This duty stems from legislation (Senate Bill 383, or "SB 383") signed by Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval on June 2, 2017. SB 383 amended the Nevada Securities Act, effective as of July 1, 2017, to remove an exclusion for financial institutions, investment advisers, and their representatives from the definition of "financial planner." Consequently, if these parties provide advice to Nevada-based clients, whether retirement or wealth management, they will be subject to a state-mandated fiduciary duty. Advice provided to retirement accounts that are subject to ERISA may be exempt from the new Nevada rule, as ERISA generally preempts state law, but it will apply to ERISA-exempt 403(b) plans. On the other hand, states have broad authority to regulate the professions, and much of what brokers and financial planners do is in the securities law arena, where state requirements might not be found to be preempted by ERISA.


Under Nevada law, a financial planner is a person who, "for compensation," provides advice regarding the investment of money or the provision for income needed in the future, or who holds himself or herself out as being qualified to perform either of those functions. Nevada law further provides that investors may sue financial planners for economic losses (and all costs of litigation and attorneys' fees) that result from following the financial planner's investment advice if the planner: (i) violated an element of his fiduciary duty; (ii) was grossly negligent in offering investment advice (taking into account the client's investment goals and financial circumstances); or (iii) otherwise violated Nevada law in recommending the investment or service at issue.


To be sure, SB 383 only imposes a fiduciary duty in the context of advice provided by financial institutions and investment advisers to Nevada-based clients. It is important to note, however, that the state-level fiduciary duty created by SB 383 is in addition to any fiduciary duties imposed on financial institutions and investment advisers under federal law.


While the fiduciary duty imposed by SB 383 has yet to be defined and is subject to future state rulemaking, it would appear to require: (i) disclosure of compensation at account opening; (ii) continual monitoring of investment strategies and products suggested by financial institutions and investment advisers in view of their clients' financial condition; and (iii) liability for financial institutions and investment advisers breaching their fiduciary duty.


The Nevada legislation is available by clicking here.


Four states (California, Missouri, South Dakota and South Carolina) already impose a fiduciary duty on financial institutions, and the trend is for increased state involvement on this issue based on the belief that it will provide more protection for consumers of investment advice than afforded at the federal level. As discussed below, Connecticut provides another example of a recent state initiative.


Connecticut law. Effective October 1, 2017, and beginning on or after January 1, 2019, any company that administers a non-ERISA 403(b) plan offered by a political subdivision of the state of Connecticut to the employees of such political subdivision, must disclose to each plan participant any conflict-of-interest that the person has with the plan. The disclosure must be made upon the participant's initial enrollment in the retirement plan and at least annually thereafter. In addition, the disclosure must include: (i) the fee ratio and return, net of fees, for each investment under the retirement plan; and (ii) the fees paid to any person who, for compensation, engages in the business of providing investment advice to participants in the retirement plan either directly or through publications or writings.


Note that non-ERISA 403(b) plans are not subject to the Department of Labor's Fiduciary Rule, but could be subject to the Internal Revenue Code rules and the BIC Exemption. Moreover, non-ERISA plans have traditionally allowed for individual contracts between annuity providers and individuals.


The Connecticut law is available by clicking here.




This Newsletter is protected by copyright. Material appearing herein may be reproduced with appropriate credit.


This Newsletter is provided for information purposes by The Wagner Law Group to clients and others who may be interested in the subject matter, and may not be relied upon as specific legal advice.  This material is not to be construed as legal advice or legal opinions on specific facts. Under the Rules of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, this material may be considered advertising.