Court orders company and owner to restore $45,699.63 to employees' 401(k) accounts

True

Evidence from credible sources supports the statement as accurate. Learn more in Methodology.

Interesting: 0/0 • Support: 0/0Log in to vote

litigation

A consent order/judgment was entered by the court requiring payment of $45,699.63 to affected employees' accounts.

Source summary

A federal court entered a consent order on Dec. 16, 2025, requiring Infrastructure & Development Engineering Inc. and its owner, James Hahn, to restore $45,699.63 to employee and former-employee accounts in the company's 401(k) plan after the Department of Labor found they failed to remit contributions and prudently manage the plan from Feb. 10, 2017, to Aug. 19, 2022. Hahn and the company were also assessed a $9,139.93 civil penalty. After restoring the funds, Hahn must take steps to terminate the plan and be removed as a fiduciary. EBSA pointed to its correction programs and provided contact information for employers and workers with questions.

View original article →

Latest fact check

The Department of Labor EBSA press release dated January 14, 2026 reports that a federal court ordered Infrastructure & Development Engineering Inc. and its owner James Hahn to pay $45,699.63 into affected employees' 401(k) accounts, with the consent order entered on December 16, 2025, for ERISA violations including mismanagement and failure to remit contributions. This directly corroborates the claim that such a court order exists and specifies the amount. Therefore, the statement is True.

Sources

Timeline

Update · Jan 15, 2026, 03:05 AMTrue
The Department of Labor EBSA press release dated January 14, 2026 reports that a federal court ordered Infrastructure & Development Engineering Inc. and its owner James Hahn to pay $45,699.63 into affected employees' 401(k) accounts, with the consent order entered on December 16, 2025, for ERISA violations including mismanagement and failure to remit contributions. This directly corroborates the claim that such a court order exists and specifies the amount. Therefore, the statement is True.
Original article · Jan 14, 2026
View article

Comments

Only logged-in users can comment.

Loading…