Case Explained: CITY OF TACOMA V. WESTERN METAL INDUSTRY PENSION FUND, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-10 Docket: 2:24-cv-00099-JNW The ninth-circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment enforcing an arbitrator’s award regarding a multiemployer pension plan’s withdrawal liability calculation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The court held that the Plan’s use of interest-rate assumptions published by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation did not satisfy ERISA’s requirement that withdrawal-liability assumptions reflect the “best estimate of anticipated experience under the plan” under 29 U.S.C. § 1393(a)(1). Relying on *GCIU-Emp. Ret. Fund v. MNG Enters., Inc.*, the court found PBGC rates were improper because they did not account for the Plan’s assets or future experience. The district court correctly ordered recalculation using a 7% interest rate, which the arbitrator found best reflected anticipated experience and was presumed correct under 29 U.S.C. § 1401(c) absent clear preponderance evidence to rebut it. Additionally, the court denied the City’s request for attorney’s fees and costs incurred on appeal under 29 U.S.C. § 1451(e), exercising discretion based on factors including the Plan’s ability to pay and whether participants would benefit from an award. The Plan must recalculate the City’s withdrawal liability using the 7% interest rate. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.