Home Paul Litner

Canadian plan sponsors would be remiss if they didn’t keep an eye to the U.S. and the developments surrounding pension legislation. Given the scarcity of Canadian legislation applicable to defined contribution(DC)plans, one could not be faulted for wondering where lawyers and consultants come up with statements surrounding an employer’s purported legal duties in relation to […]

  • May 1, 2007 September 13, 2019
  • 00:00

Quebec enacted Bill 30 last December, bringing about significant amendments to the Quebec Supplemental Pension Plans Act(SPPA), which could have profound implications for not only Quebec registered plans, but for all pension plans with Quebec members. The key funding reform enacted by Bill 30 is that all plans registered in Quebec are now required to […]

  • February 28, 2007 September 13, 2019
  • 00:00

© Copyright 2006 Rogers Publishing Ltd. The following article first appeared in the November 2005 edition of BENEFITS CANADA magazine. The Law: Passing the buck   Sponsors are increasingly signing detailed service provider contracts. But limitation of liability clauses could leave them holding the bag.   By Paul Litner GONE ARE THE DAYS WHEN THE APPOINTMENT […]

  • November 1, 2005 September 13, 2019
  • 00:00

© Copyright 2006 Rogers Publishing Ltd. The following article first appeared in the August 2005 edition of BENEFITS CANADA magazine. The Law: Give them credit   Using letters of credit to provide solvency relief for plan sponsors of defined benefit plans is an idea whose time has come.   By Paul Litner THE FUNDING CRISIS FACING […]

  • August 1, 2005 September 13, 2019
  • 00:00

It is nice to be able to report on a legal development that is good news for plan sponsors. The federal government’s 2005 budget gave the Canadian pension industry a proposal to repeal the Foreign Property Rule (FPR)applicable to tax-deferred retirement plans, through future amendments to the Income Tax Act(ITA). The elimination of the current […]

  • April 1, 2005 September 13, 2019
  • 00:00

© Copyright 2006 Rogers Publishing Ltd. The following article first appeared in the January 2005 edition of BENEFITS CANADA magazine.   The Supreme Court has ruled the differential treatment of common law and married spouses in relation to CPP survivor benefits does not violate the Charter.   By THE MOST RECENT WORD ON THE VALIDITY OF […]

  • January 1, 2005 September 13, 2019
  • 00:00