Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Lincoln Investment'.
Found 1 result
I have a question about the 403bcompare website that is run by the CA State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS). As I understand it, 403b vendors of K-12 plans in CA are required by CA State law to participate by submitting information on their offerings. Are there any consequences if the vendor omits one of the plans it sells? Is the vendor allowed to omit their low-cost option and continue to provide information on only their high-cost options? I believe this is the case with Security Benefit’s NEA Direct Invest 403b plan, and with Lincoln Investment Group’s Participant Directed Platform 403b/457 plans. I see that a school district “may not forward annuity or custodial account consideration to the vendor of any unregistered 403(b) product,” except for employee accounts started before 2004 which are grandfathered in. (403bcompare.com) In CA neither of the above self-direct low-cost plans would be legal. In a document sent to the school districts, employers are encouraged to notify the 403bCompare.com Administrator at Administrator@403bCompare.com if: The employer suspects materially inaccurate information has been provided by a vendor. and Vendor Removal Process California Education Code Section 25103 gives authority to the Teachers’ Retirement Board to remove a vendor for submission of materially inaccurate information, not submitting assessed fees within 60 days of invoice, or failing to submit notice of material changes to registered products. https://www.403bcompare.com/Documents/ED2004-04_403bCompare.pdf Scotty and Steve, what do you think? Can 403bcompare force the vendors to include all their products? Or does the school district have to start the process?