"In general, where the Secretary of Labor has authority to issue regulations, rulings, opinions, and exemptions in title I of ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code, as well as in the Department's regulations at chapter XXV of Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the term “spouse” will be read to refer to any individuals who are lawfully married under any state law, including individuals married to a person of the same sex who were legally married in a state that recognizes such marriages, but who are domiciled in a state that does not recognize such marriages. 2 Similarly, the term “marriage” will be read to include a same-sex marriage that is legally recognized as a marriage under any state law. This is the most natural reading of those terms; it is consistent with Windsor, in which the plaintiff was seeking tax benefits under a statute that used the term “spouse”; and a narrower interpretation would not further the purposes of the relevant statutes and regulations."
Technical Release 2013-04 is available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/newsroom/tr13-04.html.
The DOL's news release is available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/newsroom/2013/13-1720-NAT.html.
To read Covington & Burling's analysis, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please be aware that all comments are moderated before posting. As a result, there may be a delay between the time you submit a comment and when it is posted.