Todd Young (R-IN)
A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish that employers may offer employees a choice among tax-favored employer contributions.
A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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 amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to let employers offer employees a choice among tax-favored employer contributions. Under a qualified benefit options plan, participants may choose how to allocate employer contributions among various qualified benefits. Participants are not allowed to choose to receive cash or any other taxable benefit instead of these qualified benefits. The plan must follow specific nondiscrimination rules regarding eligibility, contributions, and benefits. These changes apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2026.
Yes· 3 of 16
- Scored +5
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
Middle-class employees receive tax protection and flexibility when choosing among various employer-provided benefits.
- Scored +5
Does this cut taxes for middle-income families?
The bill protects participants from including amounts in gross income solely for choosing among tax-favored employer contributions.
- Scored +5
Does this make health care easier to get in general?
The bill allows employer contributions to be allocated to health savings accounts and health reimbursement arrangements.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 1 (adding Section 125A(a) to the Code): Participants will not have to include amounts in their gross income solely because they are allowed to choose among different benefits offered under a qualified benefit options plan. This is positive because it protects workers from unexpected taxes simply for making a benefit choice.
-
Section 1 (adding Section 125A(b)(2) to the Code): Employees and former employees can have employer contributions allocated to helpful tax-free benefits, such as retirement accounts, health savings accounts, health reimbursement arrangements, and educational assistance programs. This is a positive outcome as it gives people flexible ways to receive tax-favored support for their health, education, and future security.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 1 (adding Section 125A(b)(1)(B) to the Code): Participants are explicitly prohibited from electing to receive cash or any other taxable benefit instead of the qualified benefits. This could be viewed as a negative burden because workers who might prefer cash to handle immediate, everyday expenses are denied that option under the plan.
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 middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class employees receive tax protection and flexibility when choosing among various employer-provided benefits. Would business owners be better off under this? — Business owners can offer more flexible benefit packages to attract and retain talent while complying with nondiscrimination rules. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income workers gain access to tax-favored support for health and education through their employers. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged workers can better direct employer contributions toward retirement and health benefits. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retired employees are included as eligible participants who can benefit from qualified benefit options plans. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Former and retired employees are explicitly included in the coverage of qualified benefit options plans. Would students be better off under this? — Working students can benefit from employer contributions directed to educational assistance programs. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults benefit from flexible options including educational assistance and health savings accounts. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Veterans in the workforce benefit from expanded choices in tax-favored employer contributions.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this cut taxes for middle-income families? — The bill protects participants from including amounts in gross income solely for choosing among tax-favored employer contributions. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Employers gain a structured framework to offer flexible benefit choices without complex individual nondiscrimination hurdles for each component. Does this cut taxes for small businesses? — Small businesses can offer flexible tax-favored benefit options plans to their employees. Is this likely to grow the economy? — By encouraging flexible allocation into retirement and health accounts, the bill supports long-term economic stability.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The bill allows employer contributions to be allocated to health savings accounts and health reimbursement arrangements.
- Education And Technology
- Does this make college cost less? — The bill allows employer contributions to be allocated toward qualified educational assistance programs.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Encouraging contributions to retirement accounts and educational assistance programs helps build long-term financial security.
- 11/10/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
Cory BookerDemocrat · New Jersey