29 C.F.R. § 5.28
§ 5.28 Unfunded plans. (29 CFR Part 5)
Operative Text
(a) The costs to a contractor or subcontractor which may be reasonably anticipated in providing benefits of the types described in the Act, pursuant to an enforceable commitment to carry out a financially responsible plan or program, are considered fringe benefits within the meaning of the Act (see 40 U.S.C. 3141(2)(B)(ii)). The legislative history suggests that these provisions were intended to permit the consideration of fringe benefits meeting these requirements, among others, and which are provided from the general assets of a contractor or subcontractor. (Report of the House Committee on Education and Labor, H. Rep. No. 308, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 4; see also S. Rep. No. 963, p. 6.) (b) Such a benefit plan or program, commonly referred to as an unfunded plan, may not constitute a fringe benefit within the meaning of the Act unless: (1) It could be reasonably anticipated to provide the benefits described in the Act; (2) It represents a commitment that can be legally enforced; (3) It is carried out under a financially responsible plan or program; (4) The plan or program providing the benefits has been communicated in writing to the laborers and mechanics affected; and (5) The contractor or subcontractor requests and receives approval of the plan or program from the Secretary, as described in paragraph (c) of this section. (c) To receive approval of an unfunded plan or program, a contractor or subcontractor must demonstrate in its request to the Secretary that the unfunded plan or program, and the benefits provided under such plan or program, are “bona fide,” meet the requirements set forth in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section, and are otherwise consistent with the Act. The request must include sufficient documentation to enable the Secretary to evaluate these criteria. Contractors and subcontractors may request approval of an unfunded plan or program by submitting a written request in one of the following manners: (1) By mail to the United States Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, Director, Division of Government Contracts Enforcement, 200 Constitution Ave. NW, Room S-3502, Washington, DC 20210; (2) By email to unfunded@dol.gov (or its successor email address); or (3) By any other means directed by the Administrator. (d) Unfunded plans or programs may not be used as a means of avoiding the Act's requirements. The words “reasonably anticipated” require that any unfunded plan or program be able to withstand a test of actuarial soundness. Moreover, as in the case of other fringe benefits payable under the Act, an unfunded plan or program must be “bona fide” and not a mere simulation or sham for avoiding compliance with the Act. To prevent these provisions from being used to avoid compliance with the Act, the Secretary may direct a contractor or subcontractor to set aside in an account assets which, under sound actuarial principles, will be sufficient to meet future obligations under the plan. Such an account must be preserved for the purpose intended. (S. Rep. No. 963, p. 6.)
Under 29 CFR Part 5 § 5.28, a contractor or subcontractor may count certain employee benefit costs as qualifying fringe benefits under the Davis-Bacon Act even when those benefits are paid directly from the company's general assets rather than through a formal funded trust or insurance arrangement — a setup known as an 'unfunded plan.' However, such a plan only qualifies if it is reasonably anticipated to deliver real benefits, is legally enforceable, is financially responsible, has been communicated in writing to affected workers, and has received prior approval from the Secretary of Labor. The rule also guards against abuse by requiring actuarial soundness and authorizing the Secretary to require a contractor to set aside dedicated assets if the plan's financial integrity is in question.
Plain English — not legal advice.
Although § 5.28 governs federal construction contractors rather than residential landlords, operators working on federally funded projects subject to Davis-Bacon prevailing-wage requirements should understand that any unfunded benefit plan used to satisfy fringe-benefit obligations must clear a multi-part compliance threshold. A compliant contractor generally ensures the plan is documented in writing and distributed to affected laborers and mechanics, submits a written approval request to the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division at the address or email specified in § 5.28(c), and maintains records sufficient to demonstrate actuarial soundness. Relying on an unapproved or poorly documented unfunded plan to offset prevailing-wage fringe obligations is the kind of practice § 5.28(d) is specifically designed to prevent.
General guidance for property managers — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult an attorney for advice on your case.
Workers — particularly laborers and mechanics on federally funded construction projects — have an interest in § 5.28 because it sets the conditions under which an employer may satisfy Davis-Bacon fringe-benefit obligations through an unfunded plan rather than a funded benefit program. Under this provision, affected workers are entitled to receive written notice of any such plan, and the plan must represent a genuine, legally enforceable commitment rather than a paperwork arrangement designed to avoid paying real benefits. Workers who believe an unfunded plan does not meet the requirements of § 5.28 may raise the issue with the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division or consult a worker-rights or labor-rights organization for guidance on available complaint and enforcement paths.
General guidance for tenants — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult a tenant-rights organization or attorney for advice on your case.
Generated September 4, 2026 — auto-generated, not yet human-reviewed. See /transparency for methodology.
Effective Timeline
References Out
No outbound references recorded yet for this provision.
References In
No inbound references recorded yet for this provision.