2025 - The (Retirement) Year in Review - "Revised" - and With a 'Twist'

 I recently did a roundup of some of the most significant retirement-related events of 2025. Then Jack VanDerhei, PhD fed that column through ChatGPT applying the style that famed humorist Dave Barry takes with HIS annual Year-in-Review. The result follows... Enjoy!

The Year in Retirement Plans: 2025

By someone who survived it and would like credit

By almost any measure, 2025 was a remarkable year for retirement plans, largely because it managed to be historically consequential without passing a single massive, system-rewriting law. This is unusual in the same way it is unusual when your roof collapses even though no meteor hit it.

There was no SECURE Act sequel. No Pension Protection Act reboot. Congress flirted with something called the One Big Beautiful Bill, then decided retirement plans should sit this one out, possibly because they were tired. Instead, 2025 delivered something far more subtle and far more exhausting: implementation problems, interpretive confusion, and enough litigation to keep ERISA lawyers hydrated for decades.

Rules were finalized, challenged, revised, challenged again, and then stared at intensely. Courts wrestled with fundamental ERISA questions that everyone thought had already been answered, except apparently not. A new Administration arrived and “recalibrated” several long-held positions, which is Washington code for “pretending we always believed this.” And fiduciaries were reminded, once again, that what really matters is not what happened, but how thoroughly you documented what you meant to happen.

Individually, these developments looked small. Collectively, they turned 2025 into one of the most important retirement-plan years in recent memory, the way a thousand paper cuts can technically count as a major injury.

Let’s relive it. Slowly. Carefully. With coffee.

January

January opened with a regulatory farewell tour from the outgoing Administration. Labor, Treasury, and the IRS issued rules addressing catch-up contributions, auto-enrollment, missing participants, and updates to the Voluntary Fiduciary Correction Program, which is the government’s way of saying, “We noticed you messed up, but we’ll pretend it was an accident.”

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court took up the question of who bears the burden of proof in ERISA fiduciary cases, a topic so exciting it caused several justices to blink slowly. At the same time, the American Airlines ESG case produced the rare legal outcome of “Yes, the process was prudent, but also no, that wasn’t loyal,” leaving observers nodding thoughtfully while quietly wondering if words still had meanings.

February

February brought personnel news, with Daniel Aronowitz nominated to lead EBSA, and legislative déjà vu, as Congress once again introduced a bill to allow 403(b) plans to invest in collective investment trusts. This bill has now been introduced so many times it qualifies for tenure.

Litigation, however, was fresh and energetic. Lawsuits challenged the use of forfeitures to offset employer contributions, including a high-profile case against Charter Communications’ $7 billion plan. A Texas judge upheld the ESG rule, surprising nearly everyone who had read literally anything else. HP won a forfeiture case, which would later become extremely important, like a minor character in a movie who suddenly gets their own sequel.

March

March brought confirmation of Lori Chavez-DeRemer as Secretary of Labor, followed immediately by more lawsuits, because the universe insists on balance.

New healthcare fiduciary claims hit JPMorgan. Johnson & Johnson saw a previously dismissed case resurrected, proving that no lawsuit is ever truly gone. One of the many BlackRock LifePath challenges was dismissed with prejudice, while Clorox discovered that winning once does not guarantee winning again, especially when forfeitures are involved.

April

April was the month litigation stopped being theoretical.

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in the Cornell University case, clarifying exactly nothing in a way that encouraged everyone to file more lawsuits. Then came a rare ERISA jury trial against Pentegra, resulting in a $39 million verdict and the sudden realization that juries exist.

Meanwhile, fiduciaries scored a win in the first pension risk transfer case, suggesting that at least sometimes, moving liabilities off your balance sheet does not automatically make you a villain.

May

May was dominated by the One Big Beautiful Bill, which turned out to be neither particularly beautiful nor relevant to retirement plans. Still, momentum continued on the 403(b)-CIT front, and the IRS announced a modest increase in HSA limits, which thrilled dozens of people.

Litigation pressed on. Forfeiture cases multiplied, some were dismissed, and one settled quietly, like a family argument everyone agreed not to mention again.

June

June brought a regulatory pivot. The Labor Department reconsidered its ESG rule and rescinded its prior crypto warning, returning to a neutral stance best summarized as, “You’re adults. Please stop asking us.”

Courts, meanwhile, began dismissing forfeiture cases with increasing confidence. Wells Fargo and JPMorgan prevailed, with JPMorgan’s victory coming with prejudice, which in legal terms means “please stop.”

July

July featured new guidance on pooled employer plans, which raised many questions and answered several others incorrectly. More notably, the Labor Department filed an amicus brief supporting fiduciaries in the HP forfeiture appeal, causing observers to double-check the calendar.

The Pentegra case settled for $48.5 million, confirming that jury verdicts are not just theoretical exercises. A Texas court invalidated part of the fiduciary rollover rule, echoing Florida, because nothing says consistency like multiple courts disagreeing in harmony.

August

August delivered an executive order encouraging retirement plans to consider private markets, including alternatives, digital assets, real estate, and lifetime income products. This marked the first time all of these were mentioned together without anyone visibly sweating.

Litigation continued, with Empower sued over alleged misuse of participant data to cross-sell managed accounts, joining TIAA and Morningstar in the rapidly growing genre of “You had the data, but should you have used it?”

September

September brought the confirmation of Daniel Aronowitz as EBSA head, thanks to a procedural maneuver best described as “now everyone is confirmed, please stop emailing us.”

The IRS finalized Roth catch-up rules effective in 2027, which somehow managed to confuse people about a requirement scheduled for 2026. The SEC fined Vanguard and Empower over managed account disclosures, and the American Airlines ESG case concluded with governance changes but no damages, proving that sometimes everyone loses differently.

October

A government shutdown slowed activity, but not enough to prevent the release of Social Security COLA figures, because retirees notice.

Courts dismissed several pension risk transfer cases for lack of harm, while allowing others to proceed based on the possibility that harm might someday exist if the universe cooperated.

November

Post-shutdown, the IRS released 2026 contribution limits and the updated FICA threshold, reminding everyone that math is relentless.

More forfeiture cases were dismissed, some explicitly citing Labor’s HP amicus brief. New cases appeared anyway, because hope springs eternal. Advisors sued the Labor Department. Attorneys sought fees. Everyone was very busy.

December

December ended the year emphatically.

The Labor Department urged the Supreme Court to review major ERISA issues, siding with fiduciaries and explicitly reversing its prior positions, which is rare and also deeply confusing to historians. The Department abandoned its defense of the fiduciary rule while hinting at a replacement, because suspense matters.

Schlichter Bogard rolled out a new wave of lawsuits targeting voluntary benefits, proving there is always another category. A Johnson & Johnson healthcare case was dismissed. The Department requested more time in Honeywell, suggesting another amicus was loading.

Congress passed a bill allowing 403(b) plans to invest in CITs, plus floated auto-IRAs, Roth rollovers, ERISA lawsuit reform, and expanded emergency savings, all of which may or may not happen, but felt important at the time.

What Did We Learn?

The defining feature of 2025 was not transformation, but stress-testing. The system was tested. Employers were tested. Courts were tested. Fiduciaries were tested, mostly on whether they kept enough meeting minutes.

And somehow, the system held. Not gracefully. Not efficiently. But it held.

Going into 2026, there will be more lawsuits, more rules, and more confident statements that turn out to be provisional. But 2025 proved something important: retirement plans continue to function not because they are perfect, but because the people running them are persistent, pragmatic, and very good at reading footnotes.

Preserving the system will require less noise, clearer rules, fair enforcement, and a collective agreement that prudence does not require clairvoyance.

On to 2026. Please stretch first.

- Nevin E. Adams, JD (and ChatGPT)

2025 - The (Retirement) Year in Review

  By almost any measure, 2025 was a remarkable year for retirement plans — perhaps especially because it passed without any sweeping, system-altering legislation. Not that that is (necessarily) a bad thing.

There was no SECURE Act moment, nor Pension Protection Act-scale reset. While retirement plans “ducked” the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, 2025 brought with it challenges of implementation, interpretation, and an extraordinary amount of litigation. Rules were finalized, challenged, and reconsidered; courts grappled with fundamental ERISA questions; a new Administration “recalibrated” long-held positions; and plan fiduciaries were reminded — again — that prudence is ultimately, if not immediately, judged by process, not outcomes.

Taken individually, many of these developments might seem incremental. Taken together, they made 2025 one of the most consequential years for the retirement system in quite some time.

Let’s take a look back at the year that was…

January

In the waning days of the Biden Administration, the year opened with a flurry of rulemaking from the Labor Department, Treasury, and the IRS. The activity touched several outstanding SECURE 2.0 provisions — including catch-up contributions, automatic enrollment for newly adopted plans, missing participant guidance, and a final update to the Voluntary Fiduciary Correction Program that added two new self-correction features.

January also set the tone for what would become a defining theme of 2025: litigation. The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on the critical question of which party bears the burden of proof in ERISA fiduciary cases — an issue that has sharply divided lower courts. Meanwhile, a ruling in the closely watched American Airlines ESG case acknowledged a prudent fiduciary process, yet nonetheless found a duty-of-loyalty violation — an outcome that left many observers (including this one) puzzled.

February

February brought both regulatory personnel and legislative developments; Daniel Aronowitz was nominated to lead the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), while in Congress, the Retirement Fairness for Charities and Educational Institutions Act was reintroduced, once again seeking to allow 403(b) plans to invest in collective investment trusts — a proposal that had stalled in the prior Congress.

Litigation continued at a brisk pace. Multiple suits challenged the use of plan forfeitures to offset employer contributions, including one aimed at Charter Communication’s $7 billion 401(k) plan (and by Schlichter Bogard LLC). A federal judge in Texas reaffirmed the validity of the Labor Department’s ESG regulation (though most expected a different decision), while HP secured a defense victory in a forfeiture reallocation case — one that would ultimately draw further attention — and support — from the Labor Department.

March

In March, the Senate confirmed Lori Chavez-DeRemer as Secretary of Labor. On the litigation front, new claims were filed alleging fiduciary breaches in healthcare plan management at JP Morgan, while an amended complaint against Johnson & Johnson revived a previously dismissed action.

At the same time, one of a dozen cases challenging the selection of BlackRock LifePath target-date funds (Cisco) was dismissed — this time with prejudice. However, a federal judge rejected Clorox’s motion to dismiss a forfeiture reallocation suit (they had prevailed on their motion last November), keeping that line of cases alive.

April

April proved to be one of the most consequential litigation months of the year. A unanimous Supreme Court decision in the Cornell University case — widely anticipated to encourage additional ERISA litigation — did little to dampen that expectation. The month also featured a rare ERISA jury trial (yes, Schlichter Bogard LLC represented the plaintiffs), resulting in a nearly $39 million damages award against Pentegra, a multiple employer plan provider.

Elsewhere, fiduciary defendants prevailed in the first decision (Alcoa) involving pension risk transfer transactions, an area seeing record volumes, spurred by interest rate movements and a strong equity market.

May

While headlines focused on the One Big Beautiful Bill — a sweeping legislative package that largely bypassed retirement plans — May still brought movement on legislation permitting 403(b) plans to invest in CITs. Regulatory activity was comparatively quiet, with the IRS announcing a modest increase in 2026 HSA contribution limits.

Litigation, however, remained active. Although new forfeiture reallocation suits continued to be filed — by an expanding roster of law firms — several were dismissed, and one of the earliest cases was resolved through a cash settlement.

June

June marked a notable regulatory pivot when the Labor Department announced it would reconsider its ESG regulation and formally rescinded its prior cautionary guidance on cryptocurrency investments, restoring a neutral stance toward plan investment choices.

That same month brought significant litigation victories for fiduciaries. Wells Fargo and JP Morgan both succeeded in dismissing forfeiture reallocation suits, with the JP Morgan decision issued with prejudice. Other plan sponsors saw similar results, suggesting that early momentum in these cases was beginning to shift.

July

In July, the Labor Department issued guidance — and data — on pooled employer plans, raising as many questions as it answered. More notably, the Department filed an amicus brief supporting fiduciary defendants in the HP forfeiture case on appeal in the Ninth Circuit.

The month also saw a $48.5 million settlement in the Pentegra litigation following the earlier jury verdict, and a federal judge in Texas invalidated a key portion of the fiduciary rule governing rollovers — echoing a similar ruling from a Florida court. The IRS, meanwhile, offered modestly helpful guidance on reporting and withholding for uncashed distribution checks.

August

August delivered a long-anticipated executive order laying the groundwork for expanded consideration of private markets in retirement plans. The directive encompassed alternative investments broadly, including digital assets, real estate, and — somewhat unexpectedly — lifetime income solutions.

On the litigation front, Empower was sued over allegations that it misused participant data obtained as a recordkeeper to cross-sell managed account services, echoing claims brought the prior year against TIAA and Morningstar.

September

September’s headline development was the confirmation of Daniel Aronowitz as head of EBSA, achieved through a procedural change that enabled mass approvals. Close behind was the issuance of final IRS regulations implementing SECURE 2.0’s Roth catch-up requirement for higher-income participants. Although effective in 2027, the rules generated confusion regarding the statutory Roth mandate scheduled to begin Jan. 1, 2026.

The month also saw two substantial SEC enforcement actions against Vanguard and Empower, citing allegedly inadequate disclosures related to participant transitions into managed account programs. The long-running American Airlines ESG case concluded with no monetary damages, but with court-ordered governance changes and participant disclosures imposed on the plan.

October

A government shutdown slowed — but did not halt — regulatory and legislative activity in October, including the release of Social Security COLA figures.

Litigation developments were mixed. Several pension risk transfer cases were dismissed on the grounds that plaintiffs had not demonstrated immediate or imminent harm. Others, however, were permitted to proceed where courts found sufficient allegations of potential injury.

November

Following the end of the government shutdown, the IRS released its highly anticipated 2026 contribution and benefit limits, including the updated FICA wage threshold relevant to the Roth catch-up requirement.

Litigation remained active. Several forfeiture reallocation suits were dismissed, with at least one decision citing the Labor Department’s amicus brief in the HP appeal. At the same time, new cases continued to emerge, including one involving Humana. November also brought a lawsuit by a group of advisors alleging Labor Department interference in deferred compensation matters, along with a request for attorneys’ fees in the American Airlines ESG case.

December

The year closed decisively. In two separate amicus briefs, the Labor Department urged the Supreme Court to review major ERISA issues — one addressing the burden of proof in fiduciary litigation, the other defining what constitutes a meaningful benchmark. In both, the Department sided with fiduciaries, and in one expressly acknowledged a complete reversal of its prior position. The Department also abandoned its defense of the fiduciary rule in court, even as its regulatory agenda signaled a potential replacement proposal in mid-2026.

Just ahead of the holidays, a new wave of litigation emerged from the Schlichter Bogard LLC firm — this time targeting voluntary benefits — accident, critical illness, cancer, and hospital indemnity insurance — none of which are employer-subsidized. At the same time, another healthcare-related fiduciary suit against Johnson & Johnson was dismissed — and the Labor Department asked for some more time, ostensibly gearing up for another amicus brief, this one in a case involving Honeywell.

Legislatively, the House passed a bill permitting 403(b) plans to invest in collective investment trusts. Additional proposals included reintroduction of Rep. Richie Neal’s (D-Mass.) auto-IRA bill for workers without access to a workplace retirement plan, legislation aimed at raising the bar for ERISA lawsuits, a bill that would permit Roth IRA rollovers, and a measure to expand and simplify PLESAs (pension-linked emergency savings accounts).

What’s Next?

Looking back, the defining feature of 2025 may not be what changed, but what was tested; the resilience of the retirement system, the willingness of employers to continue sponsoring plans in the face of growing legal risk, the ability of courts and regulators to distinguish between genuine fiduciary failures and opportunistic claims untethered from participant harm.

As the calendar turns, there is little reason to expect fewer lawsuits, simpler rules, or quieter headlines. But if 2025 taught us anything, it is that the system continues to work — imperfectly, unevenly, and sometimes in spite of itself — because of the judgment and commitment of those who operate it — and those who support them in those efforts.

Preserving that system in the years ahead will require not more noise, but clearer rules, fairer enforcement, and a renewed respect for the difference between prudence and perfection.

On to 2026!

- Nevin E. Adams, JD