Q2 2025 Newsletter
July 11, 2025
At Primark Benefits, we’re committed to helping employers and advisors navigate the complexities of retirement plans with clarity and confidence. This quarter, we’ve published a range of new articles designed to inform, debunk misconceptions, and highlight opportunities—especially those that can still make a difference for 2024. Next quarter, we'll be continuing our "Retirement Plan Myths Busting" Series and featuring a new case study showing how smart plan design solved a tricky compliance issue.
Here's What You Need to Know
It’s Not Too Late! Employers Can Still Set Up Retirement Plans and Get Large Tax Deductions for 2024
Recent changes in tax law have expanded the flexibility employers have when it comes to establishing and funding retirement plans. If you haven’t yet set up a retirement plan for 2024, we have good news: it might not be too late!
When most people think about retirement plans and pensions, what comes to mind are the big-name players: government systems, large corporations, and the financial institutions that support them such as banks, brokers, and investment firms. These organizations tend to be the visible “faces” of retirement savings, managing assets, issuing account statements, and promoting their expertise through marketing and media. But behind the scenes, there’s another essential player who often goes unnoticed: the Third-Party Administrator, or TPA. In a previous post, we explored how TPAs have emerged to meet vital client needs that large investment firms often overlook, such as tailored plan design, compliance, and personalized service. If you missed that article, click here to read it before diving into today’s topics: The risks of relying solely on asset-driven providers, and why personalized plan administration still matters.
Navigating the numerous retirement plans offered in the marketplace can be confusing, even before considering the many myths surrounding the topic. In our work with clients, we hear about these misconceptions that often steer employers in the wrong direction. In this second installment of an ongoing “myth-buster” blog series, we address three more of the most common retirement plan myths that we hear. For our first installment, click here .
Part I: A Brief History of TPAs When discussing retirement plans and pensions, many people immediately think of public sector entities and large corporations and the financial institutions that support them, such as banks, brokers, and investment firms. These entities tend to appear as the visible “faces” of retirement savings: managing assets, issuing account statements, even airing commercials touting their investment expertise. But what many folks don’t realize is that there's another key player behind the scenes: an entity called a Third-Party Administrator, or TPA. In today’s post, we explore the history of the Third-Party Administrator, beginning with the rise of retirement plans in the U.S.
Navigating the numerous retirement plans offered in the marketplace can be confusing, even before considering the many myths surrounding the topic. In our work with clients, we hear about these misconceptions that often steer employers in the wrong direction. In this first installment of an ongoing “myth-buster” blog series, we address three of the most common retirement plan myths that we hear.
For years, many California employers viewed CalSavers as something they would “deal with later.” As the state gradually rolled out mandatory retirement program deadlines based on employer size, it was easy for smaller businesses to push the issue down the road. Now, those deadlines have passed, the employee headcount threshold is now ONE— and enforcement is becoming very real.
In Part I of this series , we explored how differences in retirement plan service models can influence risks related to compliance, oversight, and fiduciary areas. In Part II, the focus shifts to a more concrete question: How do these differences ultimately affect the total cost of maintaining a retirement plan over time? While administrative fees are often the most visible expense, they represent only a portion of a plan’s true cost. The broader financial impact—what is often referred to as total cost of ownership—includes the downstream effects of operational efficiency, compliance accuracy, and the ability to fully utilize the plan’s design.
Medical and dental practices often assume their retirement plan options are relatively straightforward and should be simple to administer. In reality, these businesses frequently present some of the most complex retirement plan challenges among small-to-mid-sized employers.