Insights
Kent Mason Featured in Pensions & Investments Article Discussing a Breakdown of the Department of Labor’s Fiduciary Rule
- Published Date: March 25, 2026
On March 25, 2026, Pensions & Investments published an article titled, “A breakdown of the DOL’s fiduciary rule drama,” where Davis & Harman Partner, Kent Mason, was quoted describing the action as an implementation of a DOL regulatory agenda project.
On March 18, 2026, the Department of Labor (DOL) reinstated a 1975 regulatory test to define an investment advice fiduciary. The action follows two federal court decisions that invalidated the DOL’s Biden-era fiduciary rule on March 12 and 17. The action is also in line with DOL’s latest regulatory agenda, released September 2025, which stated that the agency intended to issue a new final rule regarding fiduciary investment advice.
As described in the reinstatement, the five-part test defines a person as an “investment advice” fiduciary if the following conditions are met:
1. They provide advice or make recommendations regarding investing in, purchasing, or selling securities or other property while receiving a fee;
2. The advice is provided on a regular basis;
3. There is a mutual understanding with the plan, plan fiduciary, or individual retirement account (IRA) owner;
4. The advice will serve as a primary basis for investment decisions with respect to plan or IRA assets; and
5. The advice will be individualized based on the particular needs of the plan or IRA.
The former Biden-era rule eliminated prongs two through four, generally finding instead that a person would be considered an investment advice fiduciary in two scenarios: (1) when they state they are a fiduciary under ERISA or (2) when they provide professional investment recommendations to investors on a regular basis in the scope of their business, and said recommendations reflect professional judgement that is in the investor’s best interest.
Mason is quoted describing the action as DOL implementing its regulatory agenda. “By the time the new administration came in, it was clear that this rule was going to be invalidated, and so that agenda item was a reinstatement of the five-part test, just as they did last week.”
A link to the article can be found here.
