A Republican bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 765.
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 is known as the Valuing Employee Stock Today Act or the VEST Act. It amends the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to explicitly include restricted stock unit programs in the existing employer equity exemption. This change means that the value or income from restricted stock units is excluded from an employee's regular rate when calculating overtime compensation. Congress finds that restricted stock units became common after the year 2000 and should qualify for this exemption just like stock options and stock purchase programs. The bill also protects employers from liability for past failures to include restricted stock units in regular rate calculations under certain conditions.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +4
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill provides administrative clarity by explicitly including restricted stock unit programs in existing overtime exemptions.
- Scored +3
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The bill allows restricted stock units to be excluded from overtime calculations, which helps protect the value of equity awards for workers.
- Scored +3
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
The bill clarifies that restricted stock units are exempt from regular rate determinations used for overtime pay calculation.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
How the text last changed
Reported in House (11/2/2026), compared with Introduced in House. Each change is on the Text tab.
The newer version of the bill adds an alternative short title, the ``VEST Act'', in Section 1. It also adds new rules regarding employer liability in Section 3, protecting employers from liability under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 for certain failures related to restricted stock unit programs. These liability protections apply to grants or rights obtained before the effective date, obtained within a 12-month period beginning on the effective date under existing programs requiring shareholder approval, or provided under a collective bargaining agreement in effect on the effective date.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 3(a): This section updates the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to add restricted stock unit programs to the employer equity exemption. This is positive because it ensures that restricted stock units are treated the same way as stock options and stock purchase programs, which encourages employers to continue offering equity participation to both salaried and hourly workers.
-
Section 3(b): This section protects employers from liability under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 for failing to include restricted stock units in an employee's regular rate before the effective date, for certain programs in existence on the date of enactment that require shareholder approval, or for programs provided under a collective bargaining agreement. This is positive for preventing sudden legal burdens on companies that offer these programs.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 3(a): By adding restricted stock unit programs to the exemption under section 7(e)(8) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the value or income derived from these units is excluded from the determination of an employee's regular rate. This might be considered a negative outcome for workers because it means that income from restricted stock units will not be factored into the calculation of their overtime compensation.
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 administrative clarity by explicitly including restricted stock unit programs in existing overtime exemptions. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill allows restricted stock units to be excluded from overtime calculations, which helps protect the value of equity awards for workers. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The bill clarifies that restricted stock units are exempt from regular rate determinations used for overtime pay calculation. Would high-income households be better off under this? — The bill provides clarity for employers providing equity-based compensation. Would union members be better off under this? — The bill clarifies the treatment of equity compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
A committee approved it and sent it to the floor
What changed from Introduced in House
The newer version of the bill adds an alternative short title, the ``VEST Act'', in Section 1. It also adds new rules regarding employer liability in Section 3, protecting employers from liability under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 for certain failures related to restricted stock unit programs. These liability protections apply to grants or rights obtained before the effective date, obtained within a 12-month period beginning on the effective date under existing programs requiring shareholder approval, or provided under a collective bargaining agreement in effect on the effective date.
Each change
- In Section 1, the text adds an alternative short title, the ``VEST Act''.
- In Section 3, the text adds provisions outlining employer liability under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) and establishes exceptions where employers will not be liable for failing to include income or value from restricted stock unit programs in an employee's regular rate.
Written by an AI model from a comparison of this version’s text with the one before it, not by a person. .
- 11/2/2026
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-868.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 765.
- 7/21/2026
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 18 - 15.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/4/2026
- 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.
Robert OnderRepublican · Missouri