Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by th…
The bill amends ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code to require spousal consent for most distributions and beneficiary changes from defined contribution plans, with limited exceptions (small withdrawals, required minimum distributions, certain annuity forms, specified rollovers). It creates a private right of action for violations, mandates a link to CFPB retirement consumer information in offers of retirement products, and authorizes competitive grants (minimum $250,000) administered by the Labor Department’s Women’s Bureau for financial literacy and assistance obtaining qualified domestic relations orders.
Left emphasizes closing women's retirement gap; right emphasizes individual autonomy
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is generally well-constructed: it clearly defines the problem, provides specific statutory language to alter ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code, and includes implementation timelines and transition rules.
The bill amends ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code to require spousal consent for most distributions and beneficiary changes from defined contribution plans, with limited exceptions (small withdrawals, required minimum distributions, certain annuity forms, specified rollovers).
It creates a private right of action for violations, mandates a link to CFPB retirement consumer information in offers of retirement products, and authorizes competitive grants (minimum $250,000) administered by the Labor Department’s Women’s Bureau for financial literacy and assistance obtaining qualified domestic relations orders.
The spousal-consent provisions take effect for plan years beginning one year after enactment, with a multi-year window for plan amendments; the grant programs are authorized at $100 million per year starting FY2026.
Technocratic consumer-protection framing helps, but new federal mandates on plans, added spending, litigation risk, and stakeholder opposition make passage moderately uncertain.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is generally well-constructed: it clearly defines the problem, provides specific statutory language to alter ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code, and includes implementation timelines and transition rules. It also establishes grant programs and a consumer-information link requirement.
Left emphasizes closing women's retirement gap; right emphasizes individual autonomy
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left emphasizes closing women's retirement gap; right emphasizes individual autonomy
Likely broadly supportive: the measure aims to protect spouses (especially women) from losing retirement assets and addresses documented retirement inequities.
The consumer-information link and grant programs for financial literacy and QDRO assistance are congruent with priorities to close gender retirement gaps.
Some implementation details (consent process, exceptions for abuse) will matter for final support; impacts on plan administration are acknowledged but secondary.
Cautiously favorable but pragmatic: supports strengthening spousal safeguards while seeking clear, workable rules to limit costs and unintended harms.
Views consumer links and targeted grants as constructive, but is concerned about implementation complexity, compliance burden, and litigation risk.
Would push for detailed Treasury/Labor regulations and phased implementation.
Likely opposed: views the bill as federal overreach that restricts individual control over retirement accounts and imposes regulatory and litigation burdens on employers and plans.
Opposed to new recurring federal grant spending and added mandates linking to CFPB materials.
Would favor preserving participant autonomy and minimizing new compliance costs.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technocratic consumer-protection framing helps, but new federal mandates on plans, added spending, litigation risk, and stakeholder opposition make passage moderately uncertain.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left emphasizes closing women's retirement gap; right emphasizes individual autonomy
Technocratic consumer-protection framing helps, but new federal mandates on plans, added spending, litigation risk, and stakeholder opposit…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is generally well-constructed: it clearly defines the problem, provides specific statutory language to alter ERISA and the Interna…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.