When the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme manifested devastating investor losses, causation litigation besieged the federal courts. Self-directed IRA account holders ran to the courthouse steps, blaming trustees and custodians for their losses.
Uniformly, the federal courts rejected all self-directed IRA account holder claims. The courts consistently held Section 408 did not create a federal common law cause of action, concluding IRA account holder claims were not afforded ERISA protections. Moreover, the courts rejected state law claims that adhesion contract exculpatory clauses should be set aside on public policy grounds. These cases demonstrated the power of "passive custodian" protections.
However, such passive custodian judicial safe harbors create a paradox. How can it be that a passive custodian derives earnings from protected retirement plan assets, while its superior specialized knowledge remains deliberately ignorant about Congress' Section 4975 impounded risk diversification policy mandate? The short answer is that extant judicial passive custodian protections are an illusion. This webcast resolves the passive custodian paradox by showing self-directed IRA account holders how to properly bring a claim against the custodian under ERISA Section 502(a)(2), notwithstanding adhesion contract exculpatory clauses.
Self-Directed IRA Litigation Lessons
Sec. 4975 Contextual Qualification
Sec. 4975 Risk Diversification
Custodial Liability Exposures
Custodial Liability Management
**This course is approved by the IRS. The submission of a completed request form, found under the materials tab, is required for credit. Please send completed form to [email protected].