A Democratic bill with 11 Democratic cosponsors · See all 11 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill requires every employer in the United States to provide their workers with a retirement program that offers benefits equivalent to the Federal Employees Retirement System, or alternatively, to have their employees participate directly in the Federal Employees Retirement System. Self-employed individuals are also required to either enroll in an equivalent retirement program or participate in the Federal Employees Retirement System. Employers and self-employed individuals are permitted to change their coverage election at least annually. The legislation sets up rules for contributions, including specific reductions for certain small employers and self-employed individuals based on their revenue or income. Additionally, the bill imposes tax penalties on employers and self-employed individuals who fail to maintain the required retirement programs or make the necessary contributions.
Yes· 3 of 13
- Scored +7
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
The bill enhances long-term retirement security for future retirees by mandating comprehensive pension and savings plans.
- Scored +7
Would retired people be better off under this?
Ensures comprehensive retirement systems and stronger overall framework for long-term financial security.
- Scored +6
Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this?
Young adults benefit significantly from early and mandatory participation in robust retirement programs over their careers.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Business owners face increased administrative responsibilities and potential mandatory financial contributions or tax penalties for noncompliance.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 3(a)(1) requires every employer to provide a comparable retirement program or enroll employees in the Federal Employees Retirement System, which ensures that all workers have access to structured retirement benefits.
-
Section 7 explicitly prohibits employers from reducing an employee's compensation to offset the costs of complying with the new retirement program requirements, protecting workers' current take-home pay.
-
Section 5 introduces a tax credit under section 36A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to assist eligible small employers and self-employed individuals with pension contributions, which can help ease the financial burden on smaller businesses and workers.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Section 6(a) imposes a tax penalty of $10 for each day of noncompliance on employers and self-employed individuals who fail to maintain the required retirement program or make mandatory contributions, which could create a heavy financial burden for struggling businesses or individuals.
-
Section 4(e)(4) and Section 4(g)(2) require employers and self-employed individuals participating in the Federal Employees Retirement System to make mandatory financial contributions, which may increase operating costs for businesses and reduce disposable income for self-employed workers.
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 retired people be better off under this? — Ensures comprehensive retirement systems and stronger overall framework for long-term financial security. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — The bill enhances long-term retirement security for future retirees by mandating comprehensive pension and savings plans. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class employees are ensured robust retirement program coverage protected against compensation reductions. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults benefit significantly from early and mandatory participation in robust retirement programs over their careers. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income workers gain access to structured retirement benefits they might not otherwise have been offered. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged workers gain structured, guaranteed pathways to secure retirement benefits as they approach their later working years. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Expands retirement coverage access to demographic groups historically less likely to have employer-sponsored pensions. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Broader access to structured retirement plans helps bridge wealth and savings gaps for minority communities. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Immigrant workers entering the formal workforce are guaranteed access to structured retirement programs. Would women be better off under this? — Women, who are often more vulnerable to poverty in old age due to career gaps, benefit from universal retirement coverage. Would business owners be better off under this? — Business owners face increased administrative responsibilities and potential mandatory financial contributions or tax penalties for noncompliance.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The legislation expands federal oversight and management of employer-provided retirement programs through the Department of Labor and FERS.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Mandatory retirement program participation helps reduce poverty among future retirees by ensuring structured savings.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill introduces tax credits and tiered contribution reductions to help small employers manage pension requirements.
- 6/2/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/5/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/12/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 9 Cosponsors added.
- 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.
André CarsonDemocrat · Indiana
Christopher DeluzioDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Jesús GarcíaDemocrat · Illinois
Adelita GrijalvaDemocrat · Arizona
Summer LeeDemocrat · Pennsylvania
James McGovernDemocrat · Massachusetts
LaMonica McIverDemocrat · New Jersey
Ilhan OmarDemocrat · Minnesota
Melanie StansburyDemocrat · New Mexico
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan
Shri ThanedarDemocrat · Michigan