A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 383.
Cleared committee, waiting for its first floor vote
A committee approved it and it is on the calendar of the chamber it started in.
This is further than most bills get, and still no promise of a vote: the calendar is a queue, and the majority leadership decides what is called. A bill can sit here until the Congress ends.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- On Calendar
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "Retire through Ownership Act," seeks to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. It focuses on providing a clearer definition of "adequate consideration" for certain closely held stock. Specifically, the bill allows fiduciaries of an employee stock ownership plan to rely on valuations from independent experts or business appraisers. These experts must use principles found in Internal Revenue Service Revenue Ruling 59-60. The Act also includes limitations on the Secretary's regulatory authority regarding this term.
Yes· 3 of 7
- Scored +4
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill provides a clearer, more reliable method for business owners to value closely held stock in employee stock ownership plans.
- Scored +3
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
The bill supports the stability and valuation of employee stock ownership plans used for retirement.
- Scored +3
Would retired people be better off under this?
The clarification of valuation rules supports the integrity of retirement funds through employee stock ownership plans.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill limits the regulatory authority of the Secretary regarding the definition of adequate consideration.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Reliance on Expert Valuations: A fiduciary of an employee stock ownership plan may in good faith rely upon a valuation provided by an independent valuation expert or business appraiser if they use specific IRS principles (Section 2(a)(1)(B)(i)). This provides a pathway for fiduciaries to determine the fair market value of assets.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts or burdens are explicitly listed in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill provides a clearer, more reliable method for business owners to value closely held stock in employee stock ownership plans. Would retired people be better off under this? — The clarification of valuation rules supports the integrity of retirement funds through employee stock ownership plans. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — The bill supports the stability and valuation of employee stock ownership plans used for retirement. Would union members be better off under this? — The bill streamlines processes for employee stock ownership plans which often benefit unionized workforces.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill provides clearer valuation guidelines for closely held stock, which facilitates easier transitions for small business owners using employee stock ownership plans. Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise? — The bill facilitates easier administration of employee stock ownership plans which can benefit organized labor structures.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill limits the regulatory authority of the Secretary regarding the definition of adequate consideration.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this strengthen Social Security? — By clarifying asset valuation for employee stock ownership plans, the bill helps secure retirement assets for workers.
- 1/14/2026
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-448.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 383.
- 10/10/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/18/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/17/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 35 - 0.
- 9/16/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/8/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Michael BaumgartnerRepublican · Washington
Chuck EdwardsRepublican · North Carolina
Lucy McBathDemocrat · Georgia
Mark MessmerRepublican · Indiana