Close Close
Popular Financial Topics Discover relevant content from across the suite of ALM legal publications From the Industry More content from ThinkAdvisor and select sponsors Investment Advisor Issue Gallery Read digital editions of Investment Advisor Magazine Tax Facts Get clear, current, and reliable answers to pressing tax questions
Luminaries Awards
ThinkAdvisor
Morgan Stanley Building in NY

Industry Spotlight > Wirehouse Firms

Advisors Battle Morgan Stanley Over Deferred Comp ‘Clawback’

X
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Lawyers for about a dozen former Morgan Stanley advisors filed a new motion this week in a complex legal saga involving the firm’s deferred compensation arrangement and its alleged refusal to pay six-figure benefits to the departed advisors.

The case, initially filed in December 2020, is set for arbitration following a ruling in November in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

In the mixed ruling, the judge declared that Morgan Stanley’s deferred compensation program is subject to the rules and requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, while simultaneously determining that the advisors must arbitrate their claims that the firm illegally withheld the deferred compensation payments after they chose to leave the firm.

The new motion was filled in response to a motion filed in December by Morgan Stanley, which called on the court to reconsider or clarify the determination in the November ruling that the deferred compensation structure in question was indeed subject to ERISA protections.

The plaintiffs’ new motion, in turn, argues this reconsideration would be inappropriate, and it calls on the judge to reject the Morgan Stanley motion and allow arbitration (or further legal proceedings) to commence.

Presumably, the Morgan Stanley defendants believe the determination that its deferred compensation plan is in fact subject to ERISA will work against them in the arbitration process.

The firm declined to offer specific comments about that question or the proceedings writ large, pointing instead to the argumentation in its most recent December filing. In that document, the firm argues the specific structure of its deferred compensation plan should not trigger ERISA protections.

An attorney for the plaintiffs suggested the amounts of compensation in question for the advisors ranges into the six figures, and that it is being withheld because of an illegal “cancellation rule” that violates ERISA, according to a Financial Planning report this week.

For their part, Morgan Stanley’s lawyers argued in a 2022 memorandum that the plaintiffs, who were at Morgan Stanley from 1996 to 2020, were offered “deferred compensation conditioned on certain express terms, including that the award would not be earned if the (financial advisor) left Morgan Stanley before it vested.”

According to a 2018 Morgan Stanley compensation plan submitted to the court, advisors’ deferred compensation isn’t taken out of their base salaries but instead comes out of their share of the revenue they have made for the firm over the previous 12 months.

The proportion withheld, according to the documents, varies from 15.5% for advisors who generate $5 million or more to 1.5% for advisors who generate less than $240,000.

The proceedings, while far from their conclusion, show clearly the complexity that can be involved in the operation of deferred compensation plans — whether or not they are subject to ERISA — from both a legal and tax management perspective.

Credit: Bloomberg 


NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.