Another Uneventful Fed Meeting Unfolds

As a highly contentious presidential election plays out in the U.S., the Federal Reserve is working to project a message of stability and consistency to support the markets.

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) announced Thursday that it would continue to hold interest rates at current levels, despite signs that the U.S. economy has made some much needed gains in the preceding months.

Of course, as noted by Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, the COVID-19 pandemic is still causing tremendous human and economic hardship across the United States and around the world. During the past month in particular, economic activity and employment have continued to recover, Powell says, but they remain well below the levels seen at the beginning of the year.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

Helping to determine the Federal Reserve’s position is the fact that weaker overall demand and earlier declines in oil prices have been holding down consumer price inflation. As such, overall financial conditions remain accommodative, in part reflecting policy measures to support the economy and the flow of credit to U.S. households and businesses.

As its mission is currently defined, the FOMC seeks to achieve maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2% “over the longer run.” With inflation running persistently below this longer-run goal, the FOMC will aim to achieve inflation moderately above 2% for some time, so that inflation averages 2% over time and longer-term inflation expectations remain anchored at 2%. Moving forward, the FOMC says it expects to maintain an accommodative stance of monetary policy until these outcomes are achieved. Though a different outcome is certainly possible, market experts anticipate accommodative policies to continue for at least the next three to five years, and potentially much longer.  

The FOMC also announced on Thursday that, over coming months, the Federal Reserve will increase its holdings of Treasury securities and agency mortgage-backed securities “at least at the current pace, to sustain smooth market functioning and help foster accommodative financial conditions, thereby supporting the flow of credit to households and businesses.”

Another notable fact about the Thursday meeting is that the FOMC policy vote was unanimous, in a change from recent meetings.

In written comments reflecting on the FOMC update, John Vail, chief global strategist at Nikko Asset Management, says U.S. third quarter earnings have been “extremely good,” as costs continued to be pared and pricing power seems very strong in many industries.

“Advertising costs and product discounting seemed particularly reduced in many industries,” Vail says. “Tech hardware and software demand surged particularly impressively. Auto companies reported much better profits than expected, due to demand for high-priced models and curtailed costs. So far in the fourth quarter, there seems little reason to expect earnings to disappoint, and, in the end, corporate profits and their future outlook are the main determinants of equity performance.”

Vail says he feels one area of concern is the lack of market attention to the fact that many recent mega-mergers, particularly in the tech sector, could be blocked on anti-competitive grounds.

Another Self-Dealing ERISA Fiduciary Breach Lawsuit Filed

The lead plaintiff in the suit says her employer, a large financial services company, has inappropriately prioritized its own investments within a profit sharing retirement plan offered to employees.

Northern Trust is the latest financial services company to face an Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) legal challenge, this one filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.

The plaintiff in the case was an employee of Northern Trust. The suit states that the defendants, which include the Northern Trust Co. itself as well as its retirement plan committee, “failed to regularly monitor plan investments and remove ones that became imprudent.” The lawsuit further alleges that the defendants “loaded the plan” with poorly performing proprietary funds, called the Northern Trust Focus Target Retirement Trusts, and then kept these funds on the plan’s investment menu throughout the class period, despite their continued underperformance.

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

Many similar ERISA lawsuits have been filed against financial services providers in the past several years, and the results have been mixed. Some cases have delivered complex but potentially instructive rulings that have in turns favored plaintiffs and defendants, while others have ended with sizable settlements from which broader legal conclusions cannot reliably be derived. Northern Trust has not yet responded to a request for comment on the new lawsuit.

“Despite a market flush with better-performing alternatives, defendants selected the Northern Trust Focus Funds to be the plan’s target-date asset class investment option,” the lawsuit claims. “The Northern Trust Focus Funds have significantly underperformed their benchmark indices and comparable target-date funds since Northern Trust launched them in 2010. For nearly a decade, the Northern Trust Focus Funds have performed worse than 70% to 90% of peer funds. Still, defendants refuse to remove the Northern Trust Focus Funds from the plan’s menu of retirement investment options.”

According to the complaint, which covers a class period of November 2, 2014, to December 31, 2019, the defendants selected the Northern Trust Focus Funds as the plan’s qualified default investment option.

“Defendants’ disloyal and imprudent decision to keep offering the Northern Trust Focus Funds in the plan has had a large and tangible impact on plan participants’ retirement accounts,” the complaint states. “Based on an analysis of data compiled by Morningstar Inc., plaintiff projects the plan lost upward of $34 million in retirement savings since 2014 because of defendants’ decision to retain the Northern Trust Focus Funds in the plan, instead of removing them.”

The text of the complaint alleges that the Northern Trust Focus Funds are the only target-date retirement investing options in the plan. The plaintiff says this means participants in the plan who want to invest in a target-date strategy have no choices other than the Northern Trust Focus Funds.

“Since their inception in 2010, the Northern Trust Focus Funds have experienced nearly a decade of continuous underperformance,” the lawsuit states. “Still, defendants have failed to remove the Northern Trust Focus Funds from the plan. During the proposed class period here, defendants even added the Northern Trust 2060 Fund to the plan’s mix. A reasonable investigation by defendants would have revealed the Focus Funds’ chronic underperformance and prompted defendants to remove and replace them with superior options.”

The full text of the lawsuit is available here.

«