Skip To Main Content
Barbara Klepper on Muck Rack

Barbara Klepper

As seen in: JD Supra, The National Law Review, Open Legal Blog Archive
Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work. Claim your profile

Get in touch with Barbara

Contact Barbara, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.

Learn more about Muck Rack

Actions

Share this page

Is this you?

As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile

Articles

The QPAM Exemption - Key Takeaways for Fund Managers with Benefit Plan Investors | JD Supra

|
By Barbara Klepper
| JD Supra
As an asset manager, you may be familiar with the regulatory issues that come into play when a fund permits investments from “benefit plan investors,” which generally include certain employee benefit plans subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”) and individual retirement accounts.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?

The QPAM Exemption – Key Takeaways for Fund Managers with Benefit Plan Investors | Open Legal Blog Archive

|
By Barbara Klepper
| Open Legal Blog Archive
As an asset manager, you may be familiar with the regulatory issues that come into play when a fund permits investments from “benefit plan investors,” which generally include certain employee benefit plans subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”) and individual retirement accounts.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?

The Pendulum Swings Back (Again) on Prohibition of Incidental Take under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act

|
By Barbara Klepper, Lynn L. Bergeson, Carla N. Hutton, Eric J. Murdock
| The National Law Review Verified
The scope of the prohibition of “take” under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA or the Act) – and specifically whether the prohibition includes the incidental (unintentional) take of migratory birds – is an issue that has been hotly debated for years. As we reported previously, the federal circuit courts do not agree on the issue, and the federal government’s position has changed several times in recent years, depending on the political party in control of the Executive Branch.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?
See all 9 articles