[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 87 (Thursday, May 23, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H4124-H4146]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SETTING EVERY COMMUNITY UP FOR RETIREMENT ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2019
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 389, I call up
the bill (H.R. 1994) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
encourage retirement savings, and for other purposes, and ask for its
immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 389, the
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on
Ways and Means, modified by the amendment printed in part B of House
Report 116-79, is adopted, and the bill, as amended, is considered
read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
H.R. 1994
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE, ETC.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Setting
Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title, etc.
TITLE I--EXPANDING AND PRESERVING RETIREMENT SAVINGS
Sec. 101. Multiple employer plans; pooled employer plans.
Sec. 102. Increase in 10 percent cap for automatic enrollment safe
harbor after 1st plan year.
Sec. 103. Rules relating to election of safe harbor 401(k) status.
Sec. 104. Increase in credit limitation for small employer pension plan
startup costs.
Sec. 105. Small employer automatic enrollment credit.
[[Page H4125]]
Sec. 106. Certain taxable non-tuition fellowship and stipend payments
treated as compensation for IRA purposes.
Sec. 107. Repeal of maximum age for traditional IRA contributions.
Sec. 108. Qualified employer plans prohibited from making loans through
credit cards and other similar arrangements.
Sec. 109. Portability of lifetime income options.
Sec. 110. Treatment of custodial accounts on termination of section
403(b) plans.
Sec. 111. Clarification of retirement income account rules relating to
church-controlled organizations.
Sec. 112. Qualified cash or deferred arrangements must allow long-term
employees working more than 500 but less than 1,000 hours
per year to participate.
Sec. 113. Penalty-free withdrawals from retirement plans for
individuals in case of birth of child or adoption.
Sec. 114. Increase in age for required beginning date for mandatory
distributions.
Sec. 115. Special rules for minimum funding standards for community
newspaper plans.
Sec. 116. Treating excluded difficulty of care payments as compensation
for determining retirement contribution limitations.
TITLE II--ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
Sec. 201. Plan adopted by filing due date for year may be treated as in
effect as of close of year.
Sec. 202. Combined annual report for group of plans.
Sec. 203. Disclosure regarding lifetime income.
Sec. 204. Fiduciary safe harbor for selection of lifetime income
provider.
Sec. 205. Modification of nondiscrimination rules to protect older,
longer service participants.
Sec. 206. Modification of PBGC premiums for CSEC plans.
TITLE III--OTHER BENEFITS
Sec. 301. Benefits provided to volunteer firefighters and emergency
medical responders.
Sec. 302. Expansion of section 529 plans.
TITLE IV--REVENUE PROVISIONS
Sec. 401. Modification of required distribution rules for designated
beneficiaries.
Sec. 402. Increase in penalty for failure to file.
Sec. 403. Increased penalties for failure to file retirement plan
returns.
Sec. 404. Increase information sharing to administer excise taxes.
TITLE I--EXPANDING AND PRESERVING RETIREMENT SAVINGS
SEC. 101. MULTIPLE EMPLOYER PLANS; POOLED EMPLOYER PLANS.
(a) Qualification Requirements.--
(1) In general.--Section 413 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(e) Application of Qualification Requirements for Certain
Multiple Employer Plans With Pooled Plan Providers.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), if
a defined contribution plan to which subsection (c) applies--
``(A) is maintained by employers which have a common
interest other than having adopted the plan, or
``(B) in the case of a plan not described in subparagraph
(A), has a pooled plan provider,
then the plan shall not be treated as failing to meet the
requirements under this title applicable to a plan described
in section 401(a) or to a plan that consists of individual
retirement accounts described in section 408 (including by
reason of subsection (c) thereof), whichever is applicable,
merely because one or more employers of employees covered by
the plan fail to take such actions as are required of such
employers for the plan to meet such requirements.
``(2) Limitations.--
``(A) In general.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any
plan unless the terms of the plan provide that in the case of
any employer in the plan failing to take the actions
described in paragraph (1)--
``(i) the assets of the plan attributable to employees of
such employer (or beneficiaries of such employees) will be
transferred to a plan maintained only by such employer (or
its successor), to an eligible retirement plan as defined in
section 402(c)(8)(B) for each individual whose account is
transferred, or to any other arrangement that the Secretary
determines is appropriate, unless the Secretary determines it
is in the best interests of the employees of such employer
(and the beneficiaries of such employees) to retain the
assets in the plan, and
``(ii) such employer (and not the plan with respect to
which the failure occurred or any other employer in such
plan) shall, except to the extent provided by the Secretary,
be liable for any liabilities with respect to such plan
attributable to employees of such employer (or beneficiaries
of such employees).
``(B) Failures by pooled plan providers.--If the pooled
plan provider of a plan described in paragraph (1)(B) does
not perform substantially all of the administrative duties
which are required of the provider under paragraph (3)(A)(i)
for any plan year, the Secretary may provide that the
determination as to whether the plan meets the requirements
under this title applicable to a plan described in section
401(a) or to a plan that consists of individual retirement
accounts described in section 408 (including by reason of
subsection (c) thereof), whichever is applicable, shall be
made in the same manner as would be made without regard to
paragraph (1).
``(3) Pooled plan provider.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of this subsection, the
term `pooled plan provider' means, with respect to any plan,
a person who--
``(i) is designated by the terms of the plan as a named
fiduciary (within the meaning of section 402(a)(2) of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974), as the plan
administrator, and as the person responsible to perform all
administrative duties (including conducting proper testing
with respect to the plan and the employees of each employer
in the plan) which are reasonably necessary to ensure that--
``(I) the plan meets any requirement applicable under the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or this title
to a plan described in section 401(a) or to a plan that
consists of individual retirement accounts described in
section 408 (including by reason of subsection (c) thereof),
whichever is applicable, and
``(II) each employer in the plan takes such actions as the
Secretary or such person determines are necessary for the
plan to meet the requirements described in subclause (I),
including providing to such person any disclosures or other
information which the Secretary may require or which such
person otherwise determines are necessary to administer the
plan or to allow the plan to meet such requirements,
``(ii) registers as a pooled plan provider with the
Secretary, and provides such other information to the
Secretary as the Secretary may require, before beginning
operations as a pooled plan provider,
``(iii) acknowledges in writing that such person is a named
fiduciary (within the meaning of section 402(a)(2) of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974), and the
plan administrator, with respect to the plan, and
``(iv) is responsible for ensuring that all persons who
handle assets of, or who are fiduciaries of, the plan are
bonded in accordance with section 412 of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.
``(B) Audits, examinations and investigations.--The
Secretary may perform audits, examinations, and
investigations of pooled plan providers as may be necessary
to enforce and carry out the purposes of this subsection.
``(C) Aggregation rules.--For purposes of this paragraph,
in determining whether a person meets the requirements of
this paragraph to be a pooled plan provider with respect to
any plan, all persons who perform services for the plan and
who are treated as a single employer under subsection (b),
(c), (m), or (o) of section 414 shall be treated as one
person.
``(D) Treatment of employers as plan sponsors.--Except with
respect to the administrative duties of the pooled plan
provider described in subparagraph (A)(i), each employer in a
plan which has a pooled plan provider shall be treated as the
plan sponsor with respect to the portion of the plan
attributable to employees of such employer (or beneficiaries
of such employees).
``(4) Guidance.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall issue such guidance
as the Secretary determines appropriate to carry out this
subsection, including guidance--
``(i) to identify the administrative duties and other
actions required to be performed by a pooled plan provider
under this subsection,
``(ii) which describes the procedures to be taken to
terminate a plan which fails to meet the requirements to be a
plan described in paragraph (1), including the proper
treatment of, and actions needed to be taken by, any employer
in the plan and the assets and liabilities of the plan
attributable to employees of such employer (or beneficiaries
of such employees), and
``(iii) identifying appropriate cases to which the rules of
paragraph (2)(A) will apply to employers in the plan failing
to take the actions described in paragraph (1).
The Secretary shall take into account under clause (iii)
whether the failure of an employer or pooled plan provider to
provide any disclosures or other information, or to take any
other action, necessary to administer a plan or to allow a
plan to meet requirements applicable to the plan under
section 401(a) or 408, whichever is applicable, has continued
over a period of time that demonstrates a lack of commitment
to compliance.
``(B) Good faith compliance with law before guidance.--An
employer or pooled plan provider shall not be treated as
failing to meet a requirement of guidance issued by the
Secretary under this paragraph if, before the issuance of
such guidance, the employer or pooled plan provider complies
in good faith with a reasonable interpretation of the
provisions of this subsection to which such guidance relates.
``(5) Model plan.--The Secretary shall publish model plan
language which meets the requirements of this subsection and
of paragraphs (43) and (44) of section 3 of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and which may be
adopted in order for a plan to be treated as a plan described
in paragraph (1)(B).''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 413(c)(2) of such Code
is amended by striking ``section 401(a)'' and inserting
``sections 401(a) and 408(c)''.
(3) Technical amendment.--Section 408(c) of such Code is
amended by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph:
``(3) There is a separate accounting for any interest of an
employee or member (or spouse of an employee or member) in a
Roth IRA.''.
(b) No Common Interest Required for Pooled Employer
Plans.--Section 3(2) of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1002(2)) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(C) A pooled employer plan shall be treated as--
``(i) a single employee pension benefit plan or single
pension plan; and
[[Page H4126]]
``(ii) a plan to which section 210(a) applies.''.
(c) Pooled Employer Plan and Provider Defined.--
(1) In general.--Section 3 of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1002) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(43) Pooled employer plan.--
``(A) In general.--The term `pooled employer plan' means a
plan--
``(i) which is an individual account plan established or
maintained for the purpose of providing benefits to the
employees of 2 or more employers;
``(ii) which is a plan described in section 401(a) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 which includes a trust exempt
from tax under section 501(a) of such Code or a plan that
consists of individual retirement accounts described in
section 408 of such Code (including by reason of subsection
(c) thereof); and
``(iii) the terms of which meet the requirements of
subparagraph (B).
Such term shall not include a plan maintained by employers
which have a common interest other than having adopted the
plan.
``(B) Requirements for plan terms.--The requirements of
this subparagraph are met with respect to any plan if the
terms of the plan--
``(i) designate a pooled plan provider and provide that the
pooled plan provider is a named fiduciary of the plan;
``(ii) designate one or more trustees meeting the
requirements of section 408(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (other than an employer in the plan) to be
responsible for collecting contributions to, and holding the
assets of, the plan and require such trustees to implement
written contribution collection procedures that are
reasonable, diligent, and systematic;
``(iii) provide that each employer in the plan retains
fiduciary responsibility for--
``(I) the selection and monitoring in accordance with
section 404(a) of the person designated as the pooled plan
provider and any other person who, in addition to the pooled
plan provider, is designated as a named fiduciary of the
plan; and
``(II) to the extent not otherwise delegated to another
fiduciary by the pooled plan provider and subject to the
provisions of section 404(c), the investment and management
of the portion of the plan's assets attributable to the
employees of the employer (or beneficiaries of such
employees);
``(iv) provide that employers in the plan, and participants
and beneficiaries, are not subject to unreasonable
restrictions, fees, or penalties with regard to ceasing
participation, receipt of distributions, or otherwise
transferring assets of the plan in accordance with section
208 or paragraph (44)(C)(i)(II);
``(v) require--
``(I) the pooled plan provider to provide to employers in
the plan any disclosures or other information which the
Secretary may require, including any disclosures or other
information to facilitate the selection or any monitoring of
the pooled plan provider by employers in the plan; and
``(II) each employer in the plan to take such actions as
the Secretary or the pooled plan provider determines are
necessary to administer the plan or for the plan to meet any
requirement applicable under this Act or the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 to a plan described in section 401(a) of such
Code or to a plan that consists of individual retirement
accounts described in section 408 of such Code (including by
reason of subsection (c) thereof), whichever is applicable,
including providing any disclosures or other information
which the Secretary may require or which the pooled plan
provider otherwise determines are necessary to administer the
plan or to allow the plan to meet such requirements; and
``(vi) provide that any disclosure or other information
required to be provided under clause (v) may be provided in
electronic form and will be designed to ensure only
reasonable costs are imposed on pooled plan providers and
employers in the plan.
``(C) Exceptions.--The term `pooled employer plan' does not
include--
``(i) a multiemployer plan; or
``(ii) a plan established before the date of the enactment
of the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement
Act of 2019 unless the plan administrator elects that the
plan will be treated as a pooled employer plan and the plan
meets the requirements of this title applicable to a pooled
employer plan established on or after such date.
``(D) Treatment of employers as plan sponsors.--Except with
respect to the administrative duties of the pooled plan
provider described in paragraph (44)(A)(i), each employer in
a pooled employer plan shall be treated as the plan sponsor
with respect to the portion of the plan attributable to
employees of such employer (or beneficiaries of such
employees).
``(44) Pooled plan provider.--
``(A) In general.--The term `pooled plan provider' means a
person who--
``(i) is designated by the terms of a pooled employer plan
as a named fiduciary, as the plan administrator, and as the
person responsible for the performance of all administrative
duties (including conducting proper testing with respect to
the plan and the employees of each employer in the plan)
which are reasonably necessary to ensure that--
``(I) the plan meets any requirement applicable under this
Act or the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to a plan described
in section 401(a) of such Code or to a plan that consists of
individual retirement accounts described in section 408 of
such Code (including by reason of subsection (c) thereof),
whichever is applicable; and
``(II) each employer in the plan takes such actions as the
Secretary or pooled plan provider determines are necessary
for the plan to meet the requirements described in subclause
(I), including providing the disclosures and information
described in paragraph (43)(B)(v)(II);
``(ii) registers as a pooled plan provider with the
Secretary, and provides to the Secretary such other
information as the Secretary may require, before beginning
operations as a pooled plan provider;
``(iii) acknowledges in writing that such person is a named
fiduciary, and the plan administrator, with respect to the
pooled employer plan; and
``(iv) is responsible for ensuring that all persons who
handle assets of, or who are fiduciaries of, the pooled
employer plan are bonded in accordance with section 412.
``(B) Audits, examinations and investigations.--The
Secretary may perform audits, examinations, and
investigations of pooled plan providers as may be necessary
to enforce and carry out the purposes of this paragraph and
paragraph (43).
``(C) Guidance.--The Secretary shall issue such guidance as
the Secretary determines appropriate to carry out this
paragraph and paragraph (43), including guidance--
``(i) to identify the administrative duties and other
actions required to be performed by a pooled plan provider
under either such paragraph; and
``(ii) which requires in appropriate cases that if an
employer in the plan fails to take the actions required under
subparagraph (A)(i)(II)--
``(I) the assets of the plan attributable to employees of
such employer (or beneficiaries of such employees) are
transferred to a plan maintained only by such employer (or
its successor), to an eligible retirement plan as defined in
section 402(c)(8)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for
each individual whose account is transferred, or to any other
arrangement that the Secretary determines is appropriate in
such guidance; and
``(II) such employer (and not the plan with respect to
which the failure occurred or any other employer in such
plan) shall, except to the extent provided in such guidance,
be liable for any liabilities with respect to such plan
attributable to employees of such employer (or beneficiaries
of such employees).
The Secretary shall take into account under clause (ii)
whether the failure of an employer or pooled plan provider to
provide any disclosures or other information, or to take any
other action, necessary to administer a plan or to allow a
plan to meet requirements described in subparagraph
(A)(i)(II) has continued over a period of time that
demonstrates a lack of commitment to compliance. The
Secretary may waive the requirements of subclause (ii)(I) in
appropriate circumstances if the Secretary determines it is
in the best interests of the employees of the employer
referred to in such clause (and the beneficiaries of such
employees) to retain the assets in the plan with respect to
which the employer's failure occurred.
``(D) Good faith compliance with law before guidance.--An
employer or pooled plan provider shall not be treated as
failing to meet a requirement of guidance issued by the
Secretary under subparagraph (C) if, before the issuance of
such guidance, the employer or pooled plan provider complies
in good faith with a reasonable interpretation of the
provisions of this paragraph, or paragraph (43), to which
such guidance relates.
``(E) Aggregation rules.--For purposes of this paragraph,
in determining whether a person meets the requirements of
this paragraph to be a pooled plan provider with respect to
any plan, all persons who perform services for the plan and
who are treated as a single employer under subsection (b),
(c), (m), or (o) of section 414 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 shall be treated as one person.''.
(2) Bonding requirements for pooled employer plans.--The
last sentence of section 412(a) of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1112(a)) is amended by
inserting ``or in the case of a pooled employer plan (as
defined in section 3(43))'' after ``section 407(d)(1))''.
(3) Conforming and technical amendments.--Section 3 of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C.
1002) is amended--
(A) in paragraph (16)(B)--
(i) by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (ii); and
(ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``, or
(iv) in the case of a pooled employer plan, the pooled plan
provider.''; and
(B) by striking the second paragraph (41).
(d) Pooled Employer and Multiple Employer Plan Reporting.--
(1) Additional information.--Section 103 of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1023) is
amended--
(A) in subsection (a)(1)(B), by striking ``applicable
subsections (d), (e), and (f)'' and inserting ``applicable
subsections (d), (e), (f), and (g)''; and
(B) by amending subsection (g) to read as follows:
``(g) Additional Information With Respect to Pooled
Employer and Multiple Employer Plans.--An annual report under
this section for a plan year shall include--
``(1) with respect to any plan to which section 210(a)
applies (including a pooled employer plan), a list of
employers in the plan and a good faith estimate of the
percentage of total contributions made by such employers
during the plan year and the aggregate account balances
attributable to each employer in the plan (determined as the
sum of the account balances of the employees of such employer
(and the beneficiaries of such employees)); and
``(2) with respect to a pooled employer plan, the
identifying information for the person designated under the
terms of the plan as the pooled plan provider.''.
[[Page H4127]]
(2) Simplified annual reports.--Section 104(a) of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C.
1024(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (2)(A) and
inserting the following:
``(2)(A) With respect to annual reports required to be
filed with the Secretary under this part, the Secretary may
by regulation prescribe simplified annual reports for any
pension plan that--
``(i) covers fewer than 100 participants; or
``(ii) is a plan described in section 210(a) that covers
fewer than 1,000 participants, but only if no single employer
in the plan has 100 or more participants covered by the
plan.''.
(e) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply to plan years beginning after December 31, 2020.
(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in the amendments made
by subsection (a) shall be construed as limiting the
authority of the Secretary of the Treasury or the Secretary's
delegate (determined without regard to such amendment) to
provide for the proper treatment of a failure to meet any
requirement applicable under the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 with respect to one employer (and its employees) in a
multiple employer plan.
SEC. 102. INCREASE IN 10 PERCENT CAP FOR AUTOMATIC ENROLLMENT
SAFE HARBOR AFTER 1ST PLAN YEAR.
(a) In General.--Section 401(k)(13)(C)(iii) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``does not exceed
10 percent'' and inserting ``does not exceed 15 percent (10
percent during the period described in subclause (I))''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to plan years beginning after December 31, 2019.
SEC. 103. RULES RELATING TO ELECTION OF SAFE HARBOR 401(K)
STATUS.
(a) Limitation of Annual Safe Harbor Notice to Matching
Contribution Plans.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (A) of section 401(k)(12) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``if
such arrangement'' and all that follows and inserting ``if
such arrangement--
``(i) meets the contribution requirements of subparagraph
(B) and the notice requirements of subparagraph (D), or
``(ii) meets the contribution requirements of subparagraph
(C).''.
(2) Automatic contribution arrangements.--Subparagraph (B)
of section 401(k)(13) of such Code is amended by striking
``means'' and all that follows and inserting ``means a cash
or deferred arrangement--
``(i) which is described in subparagraph (D)(i)(I) and
meets the applicable requirements of subparagraphs (C)
through (E), or
``(ii) which is described in subparagraph (D)(i)(II) and
meets the applicable requirements of subparagraphs (C) and
(D).''.
(b) Nonelective Contributions.--Section 401(k)(12) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating
subparagraph (F) as subparagraph (G), and by inserting after
subparagraph (E) the following new subparagraph:
``(F) Timing of plan amendment for employer making
nonelective contributions.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), a
plan may be amended after the beginning of a plan year to
provide that the requirements of subparagraph (C) shall apply
to the arrangement for the plan year, but only if the
amendment is adopted--
``(I) at any time before the 30th day before the close of
the plan year, or
``(II) at any time before the last day under paragraph
(8)(A) for distributing excess contributions for the plan
year.
``(ii) Exception where plan provided for matching
contributions.--Clause (i) shall not apply to any plan year
if the plan provided at any time during the plan year that
the requirements of subparagraph (B) or paragraph
(13)(D)(i)(I) applied to the plan year.
``(iii) 4-percent contribution requirement.--Clause (i)(II)
shall not apply to an arrangement unless the amount of the
contributions described in subparagraph (C) which the
employer is required to make under the arrangement for the
plan year with respect to any employee is an amount equal to
at least 4 percent of the employee's compensation.''.
(c) Automatic Contribution Arrangements.--Section
401(k)(13) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
adding at the end the following :
``(F) Timing of plan amendment for employer making
nonelective contributions.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), a
plan may be amended after the beginning of a plan year to
provide that the requirements of subparagraph (D)(i)(II)
shall apply to the arrangement for the plan year, but only if
the amendment is adopted--
``(I) at any time before the 30th day before the close of
the plan year, or
``(II) at any time before the last day under paragraph
(8)(A) for distributing excess contributions for the plan
year.
``(ii) Exception where plan provided for matching
contributions.--Clause (i) shall not apply to any plan year
if the plan provided at any time during the plan year that
the requirements of subparagraph (D)(i)(I) or paragraph
(12)(B) applied to the plan year.
``(iii) 4-percent contribution requirement.--Clause (i)(II)
shall not apply to an arrangement unless the amount of the
contributions described in subparagraph (D)(i)(II) which the
employer is required to make under the arrangement for the
plan year with respect to any employee is an amount equal to
at least 4 percent of the employee's compensation.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to plan years beginning after December 31, 2019.
SEC. 104. INCREASE IN CREDIT LIMITATION FOR SMALL EMPLOYER
PENSION PLAN STARTUP COSTS.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 45E(b) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
``(1) for the first credit year and each of the 2 taxable
years immediately following the first credit year, the
greater of--
``(A) $500, or
``(B) the lesser of--
``(i) $250 for each employee of the eligible employer who
is not a highly compensated employee (as defined in section
414(q)) and who is eligible to participate in the eligible
employer plan maintained by the eligible employer, or
``(ii) $5,000, and''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2019.
SEC. 105. SMALL EMPLOYER AUTOMATIC ENROLLMENT CREDIT.
(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 45T. AUTO-ENROLLMENT OPTION FOR RETIREMENT SAVINGS
OPTIONS PROVIDED BY SMALL EMPLOYERS.
``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 38, in the case
of an eligible employer, the retirement auto-enrollment
credit determined under this section for any taxable year is
an amount equal to--
``(1) $500 for any taxable year occurring during the credit
period, and
``(2) zero for any other taxable year.
``(b) Credit Period.--For purposes of subsection (a)--
``(1) In general.--The credit period with respect to any
eligible employer is the 3-taxable-year period beginning with
the first taxable year for which the employer includes an
eligible automatic contribution arrangement (as defined in
section 414(w)(3)) in a qualified employer plan (as defined
in section 4972(d)) sponsored by the employer.
``(2) Maintenance of arrangement.--No taxable year with
respect to an employer shall be treated as occurring within
the credit period unless the arrangement described in
paragraph (1) is included in the plan for such year.
``(c) Eligible Employer.--For purposes of this section, the
term `eligible employer' has the meaning given such term in
section 408(p)(2)(C)(i).''.
(b) Credit To Be Part of General Business Credit.--
Subsection (b) of section 38 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 is amended by striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph
(31), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (32) and
inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(33) in the case of an eligible employer (as defined in
section 45T(c)), the retirement auto-enrollment credit
determined under section 45T(a).''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after the item
relating to section 45S the following new item:
``Sec. 45T. Auto-enrollment option for retirement savings options
provided by small employers.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2019.
SEC. 106. CERTAIN TAXABLE NON-TUITION FELLOWSHIP AND STIPEND
PAYMENTS TREATED AS COMPENSATION FOR IRA
PURPOSES.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 219(f) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end
the following: ``The term `compensation' shall include any
amount which is included in the individual's gross income and
paid to the individual to aid the individual in the pursuit
of graduate or postdoctoral study.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2019.
SEC. 107. REPEAL OF MAXIMUM AGE FOR TRADITIONAL IRA
CONTRIBUTIONS.
(a) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 219(d) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is repealed.
(b) Coordination With Qualified Charitable Distributions.--
Add at the end of section 408(d)(8)(A) of such Code the
following: ``The amount of distributions not includible in
gross income by reason of the preceding sentence for a
taxable year (determined without regard to this sentence)
shall be reduced (but not below zero) by an amount equal to
the excess of--
``(i) the aggregate amount of deductions allowed to the
taxpayer under section 219 for all taxable years ending on or
after the date the taxpayer attains age 70\1/2\, over
``(ii) the aggregate amount of reductions under this
sentence for all taxable years preceding the current taxable
year.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Subsection (c) of section 408A
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
paragraph (4) and by redesignating paragraphs (5), (6), and
(7) as paragraphs (4), (5), and (6), respectively.
(c) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
amendments made by this section shall apply to contributions
made for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2019.
(2) Subsection (b).--The amendment made by subsection (b)
shall apply to distributions made for taxable years beginning
after December 31, 2019.
[[Page H4128]]
SEC. 108. QUALIFIED EMPLOYER PLANS PROHIBITED FROM MAKING
LOANS THROUGH CREDIT CARDS AND OTHER SIMILAR
ARRANGEMENTS.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 72(p) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating
subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E) and by inserting after
subparagraph (C) the following new subparagraph:
``(D) Prohibition of loans through credit cards and other
similar arrangements.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to
any loan which is made through the use of any credit card or
any other similar arrangement.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall apply to loans made after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
SEC. 109. PORTABILITY OF LIFETIME INCOME OPTIONS.
(a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 401 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after
paragraph (37) the following new paragraph:
``(38) Portability of lifetime income.--
``(A) In general.--Except as may be otherwise provided by
regulations, a trust forming part of a defined contribution
plan shall not be treated as failing to constitute a
qualified trust under this section solely by reason of
allowing--
``(i) qualified distributions of a lifetime income
investment, or
``(ii) distributions of a lifetime income investment in the
form of a qualified plan distribution annuity contract,
on or after the date that is 90 days prior to the date on
which such lifetime income investment is no longer authorized
to be held as an investment option under the plan.
``(B) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(i) the term `qualified distribution' means a direct
trustee-to-trustee transfer described in paragraph (31)(A) to
an eligible retirement plan (as defined in section
402(c)(8)(B)),
``(ii) the term `lifetime income investment' means an
investment option which is designed to provide an employee
with election rights--
``(I) which are not uniformly available with respect to
other investment options under the plan, and
``(II) which are to a lifetime income feature available
through a contract or other arrangement offered under the
plan (or under another eligible retirement plan (as so
defined), if paid by means of a direct trustee-to-trustee
transfer described in paragraph (31)(A) to such other
eligible retirement plan),
``(iii) the term `lifetime income feature' means--
``(I) a feature which guarantees a minimum level of income
annually (or more frequently) for at least the remainder of
the life of the employee or the joint lives of the employee
and the employee's designated beneficiary, or
``(II) an annuity payable on behalf of the employee under
which payments are made in substantially equal periodic
payments (not less frequently than annually) over the life of
the employee or the joint lives of the employee and the
employee's designated beneficiary, and
``(iv) the term `qualified plan distribution annuity
contract' means an annuity contract purchased for a
participant and distributed to the participant by a plan or
contract described in subparagraph (B) of section 402(c)(8)
(without regard to clauses (i) and (ii) thereof).''.
(b) Cash or Deferred Arrangement.--
(1) In general.--Clause (i) of section 401(k)(2)(B) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``or''
at the end of subclause (IV), by striking ``and'' at the end
of subclause (V) and inserting ``or'', and by adding at the
end the following new subclause:
``(VI) except as may be otherwise provided by regulations,
with respect to amounts invested in a lifetime income
investment (as defined in subsection (a)(38)(B)(ii)), the
date that is 90 days prior to the date that such lifetime
income investment may no longer be held as an investment
option under the arrangement, and''.
(2) Distribution requirement.--Subparagraph (B) of section
401(k)(2) of such Code, as amended by paragraph (1), is
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (i), by
striking the semicolon at the end of clause (ii) and
inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following
new clause:
``(iii) except as may be otherwise provided by regulations,
in the case of amounts described in clause (i)(VI), will be
distributed only in the form of a qualified distribution (as
defined in subsection (a)(38)(B)(i)) or a qualified plan
distribution annuity contract (as defined in subsection
(a)(38)(B)(iv)),''.
(c) Section 403(b) Plans.--
(1) Annuity contracts.--Paragraph (11) of section 403(b) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B), by striking the period
at the end of subparagraph (C) and inserting ``, or'', and by
inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new
subparagraph:
``(D) except as may be otherwise provided by regulations,
with respect to amounts invested in a lifetime income
investment (as defined in section 401(a)(38)(B)(ii))--
``(i) on or after the date that is 90 days prior to the
date that such lifetime income investment may no longer be
held as an investment option under the contract, and
``(ii) in the form of a qualified distribution (as defined
in section 401(a)(38)(B)(i)) or a qualified plan distribution
annuity contract (as defined in section
401(a)(38)(B)(iv)).''.
(2) Custodial accounts.--Subparagraph (A) of section
403(b)(7) of such Code is amended by striking ``if--'' and
all that follows and inserting ``if the amounts are to be
invested in regulated investment company stock to be held in
that custodial account, and under the custodial account--
``(i) no such amounts may be paid or made available to any
distributee (unless such amount is a distribution to which
section 72(t)(2)(G) applies) before--
``(I) the employee dies,
``(II) the employee attains age 59\1/2\,
``(III) the employee has a severance from employment,
``(IV) the employee becomes disabled (within the meaning of
section 72(m)(7)),
``(V) in the case of contributions made pursuant to a
salary reduction agreement (within the meaning of section
3121(a)(5)(D)), the employee encounters financial hardship,
or
``(VI) except as may be otherwise provided by regulations,
with respect to amounts invested in a lifetime income
investment (as defined in section 401(a)(38)(B)(ii)), the
date that is 90 days prior to the date that such lifetime
income investment may no longer be held as an investment
option under the contract, and
``(ii) in the case of amounts described in clause (i)(VI),
such amounts will be distributed only in the form of a
qualified distribution (as defined in section
401(a)(38)(B)(i)) or a qualified plan distribution annuity
contract (as defined in section 401(a)(38)(B)(iv)).''.
(d) Eligible Deferred Compensation Plans.--
(1) In general.--Subparagraph (A) of section 457(d)(1) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
``or'' at the end of clause (ii), by inserting ``or'' at the
end of clause (iii), and by adding after clause (iii) the
following:
``(iv) except as may be otherwise provided by regulations,
in the case of a plan maintained by an employer described in
subsection (e)(1)(A), with respect to amounts invested in a
lifetime income investment (as defined in section
401(a)(38)(B)(ii)), the date that is 90 days prior to the
date that such lifetime income investment may no longer be
held as an investment option under the plan,''.
(2) Distribution requirement.--Paragraph (1) of section
457(d) of such Code is amended by striking ``and'' at the end
of subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end of
subparagraph (C) and inserting ``, and'', and by inserting
after subparagraph (C) the following new subparagraph:
``(D) except as may be otherwise provided by regulations,
in the case of amounts described in subparagraph (A)(iv),
such amounts will be distributed only in the form of a
qualified distribution (as defined in section
401(a)(38)(B)(i)) or a qualified plan distribution annuity
contract (as defined in section 401(a)(38)(B)(iv)).''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to plan years beginning after December 31, 2019.
SEC. 110. TREATMENT OF CUSTODIAL ACCOUNTS ON TERMINATION OF
SECTION 403(B) PLANS.
Not later than six months after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall issue guidance
to provide that, if an employer terminates the plan under
which amounts are contributed to a custodial account under
subparagraph (A) of section 403(b)(7), the plan administrator
or custodian may distribute an individual custodial account
in kind to a participant or beneficiary of the plan and the
distributed custodial account shall be maintained by the
custodian on a tax-deferred basis as a section 403(b)(7)
custodial account, similar to the treatment of fully-paid
individual annuity contracts under Revenue Ruling 2011-7,
until amounts are actually paid to the participant or
beneficiary. The guidance shall provide further (i) that the
section 403(b)(7) status of the distributed custodial account
is generally maintained if the custodial account thereafter
adheres to the requirements of section 403(b) that are in
effect at the time of the distribution of the account and
(ii) that a custodial account would not be considered
distributed to the participant or beneficiary if the employer
has any material retained rights under the account (but the
employer would not be treated as retaining material rights
simply because the custodial account was originally opened
under a group contract). Such guidance shall be retroactively
effective for taxable years beginning after December 31,
2008.
SEC. 111. CLARIFICATION OF RETIREMENT INCOME ACCOUNT RULES
RELATING TO CHURCH-CONTROLLED ORGANIZATIONS.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 403(b)(9) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting
``(including an employee described in section 414(e)(3)(B))''
after ``employee described in paragraph (1)''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to years beginning before, on, or after the date
of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 112. QUALIFIED CASH OR DEFERRED ARRANGEMENTS MUST ALLOW
LONG-TERM EMPLOYEES WORKING MORE THAN 500 BUT
LESS THAN 1,000 HOURS PER YEAR TO PARTICIPATE.
(a) Participation Requirement.--
(1) In general.--Section 401(k)(2)(D) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
``(D) which does not require, as a condition of
participation in the arrangement, that an employee complete a
period of service with the employer (or employers)
maintaining the plan extending beyond the close of the
earlier of--
``(i) the period permitted under section 410(a)(1)
(determined without regard to subparagraph (B)(i) thereof),
or
``(ii) subject to the provisions of paragraph (15), the
first period of 3 consecutive 12-month periods during each of
which the employee has at least 500 hours of service.''.
(2) Special rules.--Section 401(k) of such Code is amended
by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(15) Special rules for participation requirement for
long-term, part-time workers.--For purposes of paragraph
(2)(D)(ii)--
[[Page H4129]]
``(A) Age requirement must be met.--Paragraph (2)(D)(ii)
shall not apply to an employee unless the employee has met
the requirement of section 410(a)(1)(A)(i) by the close of
the last of the 12-month periods described in such paragraph.
``(B) Nondiscrimination and top-heavy rules not to apply.--
``(i) Nondiscrimination rules.--In the case of employees
who are eligible to participate in the arrangement solely by
reason of paragraph (2)(D)(ii)--
``(I) notwithstanding subsection (a)(4), an employer shall
not be required to make nonelective or matching contributions
on behalf of such employees even if such contributions are
made on behalf of other employees eligible to participate in
the arrangement, and
``(II) an employer may elect to exclude such employees from
the application of subsection (a)(4), paragraphs (3), (12),
and (13), subsection (m)(2), and section 410(b).
``(ii) Top-heavy rules.--An employer may elect to exclude
all employees who are eligible to participate in a plan
maintained by the employer solely by reason of paragraph
(2)(D)(ii) from the application of the vesting and benefit
requirements under subsections (b) and (c) of section 416.
``(iii) Vesting.--For purposes of determining whether an
employee described in clause (i) has a nonforfeitable right
to employer contributions (other than contributions described
in paragraph (3)(D)(i)) under the arrangement, each 12-month
period for which the employee has at least 500 hours of
service shall be treated as a year of service and section
411(a)(6) shall be applied by substituting `at least 500
hours of service' for `more than 500 hours of service' in
subparagraph (A) thereof.
``(iv) Employees who become full-time employees.--This
subparagraph (other than clause (iii)) shall cease to apply
to any employee as of the first plan year beginning after the
plan year in which the employee meets the requirements of
section 410(a)(1)(A)(ii) without regard to paragraph
(2)(D)(ii).
``(C) Exception for employees under collectively bargained
plans, etc.--Paragraph (2)(D)(ii) shall not apply to
employees described in section 410(b)(3).
``(D) Special rules.--
``(i) Time of participation.--The rules of section
410(a)(4) shall apply to an employee eligible to participate
in an arrangement solely by reason of paragraph (2)(D)(ii).
``(ii) 12-month periods.--12-month periods shall be
determined in the same manner as under the last sentence of
section 410(a)(3)(A).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to plan years beginning after December 31, 2020,
except that, for purposes of section 401(k)(2)(D)(ii) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by such amendments),
12-month periods beginning before January 1, 2021, shall not
be taken into account.
SEC. 113. PENALTY-FREE WITHDRAWALS FROM RETIREMENT PLANS FOR
INDIVIDUALS IN CASE OF BIRTH OF CHILD OR
ADOPTION.
(a) In General.--Section 72(t)(2) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph:
``(H) Distributions from retirement plans in case of birth
of child or adoption.--
``(i) In general.--Any qualified birth or adoption
distribution.
``(ii) Limitation.--The aggregate amount which may be
treated as qualified birth or adoption distributions by any
individual with respect to any birth or adoption shall not
exceed $5,000.
``(iii) Qualified birth or adoption distribution.--For
purposes of this subparagraph--
``(I) In general.--The term `qualified birth or adoption
distribution' means any distribution from an applicable
eligible retirement plan to an individual if made during the
1-year period beginning on the date on which a child of the
individual is born or on which the legal adoption by the
individual of an eligible adoptee is finalized.
``(II) Eligible adoptee.--The term `eligible adoptee' means
any individual (other than a child of the taxpayer's spouse)
who has not attained age 18 or is physically or mentally
incapable of self-support.
``(iv) Treatment of plan distributions.--
``(I) In general.--If a distribution to an individual would
(without regard to clause (ii)) be a qualified birth or
adoption distribution, a plan shall not be treated as failing
to meet any requirement of this title merely because the plan
treats the distribution as a qualified birth or adoption
distribution, unless the aggregate amount of such
distributions from all plans maintained by the employer (and
any member of any controlled group which includes the
employer) to such individual exceeds $5,000.
``(II) Controlled group.--For purposes of subclause (I),
the term `controlled group' means any group treated as a
single employer under subsection (b), (c), (m), or (o) of
section 414.
``(v) Amount distributed may be repaid.--
``(I) In general.--Any individual who receives a qualified
birth or adoption distribution may make one or more
contributions in an aggregate amount not to exceed the amount
of such distribution to an applicable eligible retirement
plan of which such individual is a beneficiary and to which a
rollover contribution of such distribution could be made
under section 402(c), 403(a)(4), 403(b)(8), 408(d)(3), or
457(e)(16), as the case may be.
``(II) Limitation on contributions to applicable eligible
retirement plans other than iras.--The aggregate amount of
contributions made by an individual under subclause (I) to
any applicable eligible retirement plan which is not an
individual retirement plan shall not exceed the aggregate
amount of qualified birth or adoption distributions which are
made from such plan to such individual. Subclause (I) shall
not apply to contributions to any applicable eligible
retirement plan which is not an individual retirement plan
unless the individual is eligible to make contributions
(other than those described in subclause (I)) to such
applicable eligible retirement plan.
``(III) Treatment of repayments of distributions from
applicable eligible retirement plans other than IRAs.--If a
contribution is made under subclause (I) with respect to a
qualified birth or adoption distribution from an applicable
eligible retirement plan other than an individual retirement
plan, then the taxpayer shall, to the extent of the amount of
the contribution, be treated as having received such
distribution in an eligible rollover distribution (as defined
in section 402(c)(4)) and as having transferred the amount to
the applicable eligible retirement plan in a direct trustee
to trustee transfer within 60 days of the distribution.
``(IV) Treatment of repayments for distributions from
iras.--If a contribution is made under subclause (I) with
respect to a qualified birth or adoption distribution from an
individual retirement plan, then, to the extent of the amount
of the contribution, such distribution shall be treated as a
distribution described in section 408(d)(3) and as having
been transferred to the applicable eligible retirement plan
in a direct trustee to trustee transfer within 60 days of the
distribution.
``(vi) Definition and special rules.--For purposes of this
subparagraph--
``(I) Applicable eligible retirement plan.--The term
`applicable eligible retirement plan' means an eligible
retirement plan (as defined in section 402(c)(8)(B)) other
than a defined benefit plan.
``(II) Exemption of distributions from trustee to trustee
transfer and withholding rules.--For purposes of sections
401(a)(31), 402(f), and 3405, a qualified birth or adoption
distribution shall not be treated as an eligible rollover
distribution.
``(III) Taxpayer must include tin.--A distribution shall
not be treated as a qualified birth or adoption distribution
with respect to any child or eligible adoptee unless the
taxpayer includes the name, age, and TIN of such child or
eligible adoptee on the taxpayer's return of tax for the
taxable year.
``(IV) Distributions treated as meeting plan distribution
requirements.--Any qualified birth or adoption distribution
shall be treated as meeting the requirements of sections
401(k)(2)(B)(i), 403(b)(7)(A)(ii), 403(b)(11), and
457(d)(1)(A).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to distributions made after December 31, 2019.
SEC. 114. INCREASE IN AGE FOR REQUIRED BEGINNING DATE FOR
MANDATORY DISTRIBUTIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 401(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``age 70\1/2\''
and inserting ``age 72''.
(b) Spouse Beneficiaries; Special Rule for Owners.--
Subparagraphs (B)(iv)(I) and (C)(ii)(I) of section 401(a)(9)
of such Code are each amended by striking ``age 70\1/2\'' and
inserting ``age 72''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) The last sentence of section 408(b) of such Code is
amended by striking ``age 70\1/2\'' and inserting ``age 72''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to distributions required to be made after
December 31, 2019, with respect to individuals who attain age
70\1/2\ after such date.
SEC. 115. SPECIAL RULES FOR MINIMUM FUNDING STANDARDS FOR
COMMUNITY NEWSPAPER PLANS.
(a) Amendment to Internal Revenue Code of 1986.--Section
430 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding
at the end the following new subsection:
``(m) Special Rules for Community Newspaper Plans.--
``(1) In general.--The plan sponsor of a community
newspaper plan under which no participant has had the
participant's accrued benefit increased (whether because of
service or compensation) after December 31, 2017, may elect
to have the alternative standards described in paragraph (3)
apply to such plan, and any plan sponsored by any member of
the same controlled group.
``(2) Election.--An election under paragraph (1) shall be
made at such time and in such manner as prescribed by the
Secretary. Such election, once made with respect to a plan
year, shall apply to all subsequent plan years unless revoked
with the consent of the Secretary.
``(3) Alternative minimum funding standards.--The
alternative standards described in this paragraph are the
following:
``(A) Interest rates.--
``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (h)(2)(C) and
except as provided in clause (ii), the first, second, and
third segment rates in effect for any month for purposes of
this section shall be 8 percent.
``(ii) New benefit accruals.--Notwithstanding subsection
(h)(2), for purposes of determining the funding target and
normal cost of a plan for any plan year, the present value of
any benefits accrued or earned under the plan for a plan year
with respect to which an election under paragraph (1) is in
effect shall be determined on the basis of the U.S. Treasury
obligation yield curve for the day that is the valuation date
of such plan for such plan year.
``(iii) U.S. treasury obligation yield curve.--For purposes
of this subsection, the term `U.S. Treasury obligation yield
curve' means, with respect to any day, a yield curve which
shall be prescribed by the Secretary for such day on
interest-bearing obligations of the United States.
``(B) Shortfall amortization base.--
``(i) Previous shortfall amortization bases.--The shortfall
amortization bases determined under subsection (c)(3) for all
plan years
[[Page H4130]]
preceding the first plan year to which the election under
paragraph (1) applies (and all shortfall amortization
installments determined with respect to such bases) shall be
reduced to zero under rules similar to the rules of
subsection (c)(6).
``(ii) New shortfall amortization base.--Notwithstanding
subsection (c)(3), the shortfall amortization base for the
first plan year to which the election under paragraph (1)
applies shall be the funding shortfall of such plan for such
plan year (determined using the interest rates as modified
under subparagraph (A)).
``(C) Determination of shortfall amortization
installments.--
``(i) 30-year period.--Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
subsection (c)(2) shall be applied by substituting `30-plan-
year' for `7-plan-year' each place it appears.
``(ii) No special election.--The election under
subparagraph (D) of subsection (c)(2) shall not apply to any
plan year to which the election under paragraph (1) applies.
``(D) Exemption from at-risk treatment.--Subsection (i)
shall not apply.
``(4) Community newspaper plan.--For purposes of this
subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `community newspaper plan'
means a plan to which this section applies maintained by an
employer which, as of December 31, 2017--
``(i) publishes and distributes daily, either
electronically or in printed form, 1 or more community
newspapers in a single State,
``(ii) is not a company the stock of which is publicly
traded (on a stock exchange or in an over-the-counter
market), and is not controlled, directly or indirectly, by
such a company,
``(iii) is controlled, directly or indirectly--
``(I) by 1 or more persons residing primarily in the State
in which the community newspaper is published,
``(II) for not less than 30 years by individuals who are
members of the same family,
``(III) by a trust created or organized in the State in
which the community newspaper is published, the sole trustees
of which are persons described in subclause (I) or (II),
``(IV) by an entity which is described in section 501(c)(3)
and exempt from taxation under section 501(a), which is
organized and operated in the State in which the community
newspaper is published, and the primary purpose of which is
to benefit communities in such State, or
``(V) by a combination of persons described in subclause
(I), (III), or (IV), and
``(iv) does not control, directly or indirectly, any
newspaper in any other State.
``(B) Community newspaper.--The term `community newspaper'
means a newspaper which primarily serves a metropolitan
statistical area, as determined by the Office of Management
and Budget, with a population of not less than 100,000.
``(C) Control.--A person shall be treated as controlled by
another person if such other person possesses, directly or
indirectly, the power to direct or cause the direction and
management of such person (including the power to elect a
majority of the members of the board of directors of such
person) through the ownership of voting securities.
``(5) Controlled group.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term `controlled group' means all persons treated as a
single employer under subsection (b), (c), (m), or (o) of
section 414 as of the date of the enactment of this
subsection.''.
(b) Amendment to Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974.--Section 303 of the Employee Retirement Income Security
Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1083) is amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(m) Special Rules for Community Newspaper Plans.--
``(1) In general.--The plan sponsor of a community
newspaper plan under which no participant has had the
participant's accrued benefit increased (whether because of
service or compensation) after December 31, 2017, may elect
to have the alternative standards described in paragraph (3)
apply to such plan, and any plan sponsored by any member of
the same controlled group.
``(2) Election.--An election under paragraph (1) shall be
made at such time and in such manner as prescribed by the
Secretary of the Treasury. Such election, once made with
respect to a plan year, shall apply to all subsequent plan
years unless revoked with the consent of the Secretary of the
Treasury.
``(3) Alternative minimum funding standards.--The
alternative standards described in this paragraph are the
following:
``(A) Interest rates.--
``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (h)(2)(C) and
except as provided in clause (ii), the first, second, and
third segment rates in effect for any month for purposes of
this section shall be 8 percent.
``(ii) New benefit accruals.--Notwithstanding subsection
(h)(2), for purposes of determining the funding target and
normal cost of a plan for any plan year, the present value of
any benefits accrued or earned under the plan for a plan year
with respect to which an election under paragraph (1) is in
effect shall be determined on the basis of the U.S. Treasury
obligation yield curve for the day that is the valuation date
of such plan for such plan year.
``(iii) U.S. treasury obligation yield curve.--For purposes
of this subsection, the term `U.S. Treasury obligation yield
curve' means, with respect to any day, a yield curve which
shall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury for such
day on interest-bearing obligations of the United States.
``(B) Shortfall amortization base.--
``(i) Previous shortfall amortization bases.--The shortfall
amortization bases determined under subsection (c)(3) for all
plan years preceding the first plan year to which the
election under paragraph (1) applies (and all shortfall
amortization installments determined with respect to such
bases) shall be reduced to zero under rules similar to the
rules of subsection (c)(6).
``(ii) New shortfall amortization base.--Notwithstanding
subsection (c)(3), the shortfall amortization base for the
first plan year to which the election under paragraph (1)
applies shall be the funding shortfall of such plan for such
plan year (determined using the interest rates as modified
under subparagraph (A)).
``(C) Determination of shortfall amortization
installments.--
``(i) 30-year period.--Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
subsection (c)(2) shall be applied by substituting `30-plan-
year' for `7-plan-year' each place it appears.
``(ii) No special election.--The election under
subparagraph (D) of subsection (c)(2) shall not apply to any
plan year to which the election under paragraph (1) applies.
``(D) Exemption from at-risk treatment.--Subsection (i)
shall not apply.
``(4) Community newspaper plan.--For purposes of this
subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `community newspaper plan'
means a plan to which this section applies maintained by an
employer which, as of December 31, 2017--
``(i) publishes and distributes daily, either
electronically or in printed form--
``(I) a community newspaper, or
``(II) 1 or more community newspapers in the same State,
``(ii) is not a company the stock of which is publicly
traded (on a stock exchange or in an over-the-counter
market), and is not controlled, directly or indirectly, by
such a company,
``(iii) is controlled, directly or indirectly--
``(I) by 1 or more persons residing primarily in the State
in which the community newspaper is published,
``(II) for not less than 30 years by individuals who are
members of the same family,
``(III) by a trust created or organized in the State in
which the community newspaper is published, the sole trustees
of which are persons described in subclause (I) or (II),
``(IV) by an entity which is described in section 501(c)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from taxation
under section 501(a) of such Code, which is organized and
operated in the State in which the community newspaper is
published, and the primary purpose of which is to benefit
communities in such State, or
``(V) by a combination of persons described in subclause
(I), (III), or (IV), and
``(iv) does not control, directly or indirectly, any
newspaper in any other State.
``(B) Community newspaper.--The term `community newspaper'
means a newspaper which primarily serves a metropolitan
statistical area, as determined by the Office of Management
and Budget, with a population of not less than 100,000.
``(C) Control.--A person shall be treated as controlled by
another person if such other person possesses, directly or
indirectly, the power to direct or cause the direction and
management of such person (including the power to elect a
majority of the members of the board of directors of such
person) through the ownership of voting securities.
``(5) Controlled group.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term `controlled group' means all persons treated as a
single employer under subsection (b), (c), (m), or (o) of
section 414 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as of the
date of the enactment of this subsection.
``(6) Effect on premium rate calculation.--Notwithstanding
any other provision of law or any regulation issued by the
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, in the case of a plan
for which an election is made to apply the alternative
standards described in paragraph (3), the additional premium
under section 4006(a)(3)(E) shall be determined as if such
election had not been made.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to plan years ending after December 31, 2017.
SEC. 116. TREATING EXCLUDED DIFFICULTY OF CARE PAYMENTS AS
COMPENSATION FOR DETERMINING RETIREMENT
CONTRIBUTION LIMITATIONS.
(a) Individual Retirement Accounts.--
(1) In general.--Section 408(o) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(5) Special rule for difficulty of care payments excluded
from gross income.--In the case of an individual who for a
taxable year excludes from gross income under section 131 a
qualified foster care payment which is a difficulty of care
payment, if--
``(A) the deductible amount in effect for the taxable year
under subsection (b), exceeds
``(B) the amount of compensation includible in the
individual's gross income for the taxable year,
the individual may elect to increase the nondeductible limit
under paragraph (2) for the taxable year by an amount equal
to the lesser of such excess or the amount so excluded.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall apply to contributions after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
(b) Defined Contribution Plans.--
(1) In general.--Section 415(c) of such Code is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(8) Special rule for difficulty of care payments excluded
from gross income.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(B), in the
case of an individual who for a taxable year excludes from
gross income under section 131 a qualified foster care
payment which is a difficulty of care payment, the
participant's compensation, or earned income, as the case may
be, shall be increased by the amount so excluded.
[[Page H4131]]
``(B) Contributions allocable to difficulty of care
payments treated as after-tax.--Any contribution by the
participant which is allowable due to such increase--
``(i) shall be treated for purposes of this title as
investment in the contract, and
``(ii) shall not cause a plan (and any arrangement which is
part of such plan) to be treated as failing to meet any
requirements of this chapter solely by reason of allowing any
such contributions.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall apply to plan years beginning after December 31, 2015.
TITLE II--ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
SEC. 201. PLAN ADOPTED BY FILING DUE DATE FOR YEAR MAY BE
TREATED AS IN EFFECT AS OF CLOSE OF YEAR.
(a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 401 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``Retroactive Changes in Plan.--A stock
bonus'' and inserting ``Plan Amendments.--
``(1) Certain retroactive changes in plan.--A stock
bonus''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Adoption of plan.--If an employer adopts a stock
bonus, pension, profit-sharing, or annuity plan after the
close of a taxable year but before the time prescribed by law
for filing the return of the employer for the taxable year
(including extensions thereof), the employer may elect to
treat the plan as having been adopted as of the last day of
the taxable year.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to plans adopted for taxable years beginning
after December 31, 2019.
SEC. 202. COMBINED ANNUAL REPORT FOR GROUP OF PLANS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Treasury and the
Secretary of Labor shall, in cooperation, modify the returns
required under section 6058 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 and the reports required by section 104 of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1024) so
that all members of a group of plans described in subsection
(c) may file a single aggregated annual return or report
satisfying the requirements of both such sections.
(b) Administrative Requirements.--In developing the
consolidated return or report under subsection (a), the
Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Labor may
require such return or report to include any information
regarding each plan in the group as such Secretaries
determine is necessary or appropriate for the enforcement and
administration of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and shall
require such information as will enable a participant in a
plan to identify any aggregated return or report filed with
respect to the plan.
(c) Plans Described.--A group of plans is described in this
subsection if all plans in the group--
(1) are individual account plans or defined contribution
plans (as defined in section 3(34) of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1002(34)) or in
section 414(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986);
(2) have--
(A) the same trustee (as described in section 403(a) of
such Act (29 U.S.C. 1103(a)));
(B) the same one or more named fiduciaries (as described in
section 402(a) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 1102(a)));
(C) the same administrator (as defined in section 3(16)(A)
of such Act (29 U.S.C. 1002(16)(A))) and plan administrator
(as defined in section 414(g) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986); and
(D) plan years beginning on the same date; and
(3) provide the same investments or investment options to
participants and beneficiaries.
A plan not subject to title I of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 shall be treated as meeting the
requirements of paragraph (2) as part of a group of plans if
the same person that performs each of the functions described
in such paragraph, as applicable, for all other plans in such
group performs each of such functions for such plan.
(d) Clarification Relating to Electronic Filing of Returns
for Deferred Compensation Plans.--
(1) In general.--Section 6011(e) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(6) Application of numerical limitation to returns
relating to deferred compensation plans.--For purposes of
applying the numerical limitation under paragraph (2)(A) to
any return required under section 6058, information regarding
each plan for which information is provided on such return
shall be treated as a separate return.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall apply to returns required to be filed with respect to
plan years beginning after December 31, 2019.
(e) Effective Date.--The modification required by
subsection (a) shall be implemented not later than January 1,
2022, and shall apply to returns and reports for plan years
beginning after December 31, 2021.
SEC. 203. DISCLOSURE REGARDING LIFETIME INCOME.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 105(a)(2) of
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29
U.S.C. 1025(a)(2)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in clause (ii), by striking ``diversification.'' and
inserting ``diversification, and''; and
(3) by inserting at the end the following:
``(iii) the lifetime income disclosure described in
subparagraph (D)(i).
In the case of pension benefit statements described in clause
(i) of paragraph (1)(A), a lifetime income disclosure under
clause (iii) of this subparagraph shall be required to be
included in only one pension benefit statement during any one
12-month period.''.
(b) Lifetime Income.--Paragraph (2) of section 105(a) of
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29
U.S.C. 1025(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph:
``(D) Lifetime income disclosure.--
``(i) In general.--
``(I) Disclosure.--A lifetime income disclosure shall set
forth the lifetime income stream equivalent of the total
benefits accrued with respect to the participant or
beneficiary.
``(II) Lifetime income stream equivalent of the total
benefits accrued.--For purposes of this subparagraph, the
term `lifetime income stream equivalent of the total benefits
accrued' means the amount of monthly payments the participant
or beneficiary would receive if the total accrued benefits of
such participant or beneficiary were used to provide lifetime
income streams described in subclause (III), based on
assumptions specified in rules prescribed by the Secretary.
``(III) Lifetime income streams.--The lifetime income
streams described in this subclause are a qualified joint and
survivor annuity (as defined in section 205(d)), based on
assumptions specified in rules prescribed by the Secretary,
including the assumption that the participant or beneficiary
has a spouse of equal age, and a single life annuity. Such
lifetime income streams may have a term certain or other
features to the extent permitted under rules prescribed by
the Secretary.
``(ii) Model disclosure.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of the enactment of the Setting Every Community Up for
Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019, the Secretary shall issue
a model lifetime income disclosure, written in a manner so as
to be understood by the average plan participant, which--
``(I) explains that the lifetime income stream equivalent
is only provided as an illustration;
``(II) explains that the actual payments under the lifetime
income stream described in clause (i)(III) which may be
purchased with the total benefits accrued will depend on
numerous factors and may vary substantially from the lifetime
income stream equivalent in the disclosures;
``(III) explains the assumptions upon which the lifetime
income stream equivalent was determined; and
``(IV) provides such other similar explanations as the
Secretary considers appropriate.
``(iii) Assumptions and rules.--Not later than 1 year after
the date of the enactment of the Setting Every Community Up
for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019, the Secretary shall--
``(I) prescribe assumptions which administrators of
individual account plans may use in converting total accrued
benefits into lifetime income stream equivalents for purposes
of this subparagraph; and
``(II) issue interim final rules under clause (i).
In prescribing assumptions under subclause (I), the Secretary
may prescribe a single set of specific assumptions (in which
case the Secretary may issue tables or factors which
facilitate such conversions), or ranges of permissible
assumptions. To the extent that an accrued benefit is or may
be invested in a lifetime income stream described in clause
(i)(III), the assumptions prescribed under subclause (I)
shall, to the extent appropriate, permit administrators of
individual account plans to use the amounts payable under
such lifetime income stream as a lifetime income stream
equivalent.
``(iv) Limitation on liability.--No plan fiduciary, plan
sponsor, or other person shall have any liability under this
title solely by reason of the provision of lifetime income
stream equivalents which are derived in accordance with the
assumptions and rules described in clause (iii) and which
include the explanations contained in the model lifetime
income disclosure described in clause (ii). This clause shall
apply without regard to whether the provision of such
lifetime income stream equivalent is required by subparagraph
(B)(iii).
``(v) Effective date.--The requirement in subparagraph
(B)(iii) shall apply to pension benefit statements furnished
more than 12 months after the latest of the issuance by the
Secretary of--
``(I) interim final rules under clause (i);
``(II) the model disclosure under clause (ii); or
``(III) the assumptions under clause (iii).''.
SEC. 204. FIDUCIARY SAFE HARBOR FOR SELECTION OF LIFETIME
INCOME PROVIDER.
Section 404 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1104) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(e) Safe Harbor for Annuity Selection.--
``(1) In general.--With respect to the selection of an
insurer for a guaranteed retirement income contract, the
requirements of subsection (a)(1)(B) will be deemed to be
satisfied if a fiduciary--
``(A) engages in an objective, thorough, and analytical
search for the purpose of identifying insurers from which to
purchase such contracts;
``(B) with respect to each insurer identified under
subparagraph (A)--
``(i) considers the financial capability of such insurer to
satisfy its obligations under the guaranteed retirement
income contract; and
``(ii) considers the cost (including fees and commissions)
of the guaranteed retirement income contract offered by the
insurer in relation to the benefits and product features of
the contract and administrative services to be provided under
such contract; and
``(C) on the basis of such consideration, concludes that--
[[Page H4132]]
``(i) at the time of the selection, the insurer is
financially capable of satisfying its obligations under the
guaranteed retirement income contract; and
``(ii) the relative cost of the selected guaranteed
retirement income contract as described in subparagraph
(B)(ii) is reasonable.
``(2) Financial capability of the insurer.--A fiduciary
will be deemed to satisfy the requirements of paragraphs
(1)(B)(i) and (1)(C)(i) if--
``(A) the fiduciary obtains written representations from
the insurer that--
``(i) the insurer is licensed to offer guaranteed
retirement income contracts;
``(ii) the insurer, at the time of selection and for each
of the immediately preceding 7 plan years--
``(I) operates under a certificate of authority from the
insurance commissioner of its domiciliary State which has not
been revoked or suspended;
``(II) has filed audited financial statements in accordance
with the laws of its domiciliary State under applicable
statutory accounting principles;
``(III) maintains (and has maintained) reserves which
satisfies all the statutory requirements of all States where
the insurer does business; and
``(IV) is not operating under an order of supervision,
rehabilitation, or liquidation;
``(iii) the insurer undergoes, at least every 5 years, a
financial examination (within the meaning of the law of its
domiciliary State) by the insurance commissioner of the
domiciliary State (or representative, designee, or other
party approved by such commissioner); and
``(iv) the insurer will notify the fiduciary of any change
in circumstances occurring after the provision of the
representations in clauses (i), (ii), and (iii) which would
preclude the insurer from making such representations at the
time of issuance of the guaranteed retirement income
contract; and
``(B) after receiving such representations and as of the
time of selection, the fiduciary has not received any notice
described in subparagraph (A)(iv) and is in possession of no
other information which would cause the fiduciary to question
the representations provided.
``(3) No requirement to select lowest cost.--Nothing in
this subsection shall be construed to require a fiduciary to
select the lowest cost contract. A fiduciary may consider the
value of a contract, including features and benefits of the
contract and attributes of the insurer (including, without
limitation, the insurer's financial strength) in conjunction
with the cost of the contract.
``(4) Time of selection.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of this subsection, the
time of selection is--
``(i) the time that the insurer and the contract are
selected for distribution of benefits to a specific
participant or beneficiary; or
``(ii) if the fiduciary periodically reviews the continuing
appropriateness of the conclusion described in paragraph
(1)(C) with respect to a selected insurer, taking into
account the considerations described in such paragraph, the
time that the insurer and the contract are selected to
provide benefits at future dates to participants or
beneficiaries under the plan.
Nothing in the preceding sentence shall be construed to
require the fiduciary to review the appropriateness of a
selection after the purchase of a contract for a participant
or beneficiary.
``(B) Periodic review.--A fiduciary will be deemed to have
conducted the periodic review described in subparagraph
(A)(ii) if the fiduciary obtains the written representations
described in clauses (i), (ii), and (iii) of paragraph (2)(A)
from the insurer on an annual basis, unless the fiduciary
receives any notice described in paragraph (2)(A)(iv) or
otherwise becomes aware of facts that would cause the
fiduciary to question such representations.
``(5) Limited liability.--A fiduciary which satisfies the
requirements of this subsection shall not be liable following
the distribution of any benefit, or the investment by or on
behalf of a participant or beneficiary pursuant to the
selected guaranteed retirement income contract, for any
losses that may result to the participant or beneficiary due
to an insurer's inability to satisfy its financial
obligations under the terms of such contract.
``(6) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) Insurer.--The term `insurer' means an insurance
company, insurance service, or insurance organization,
including affiliates of such companies.
``(B) Guaranteed retirement income contract.--The term
`guaranteed retirement income contract' means an annuity
contract for a fixed term or a contract (or provision or
feature thereof) which provides guaranteed benefits annually
(or more frequently) for at least the remainder of the life
of the participant or the joint lives of the participant and
the participant's designated beneficiary as part of an
individual account plan.''.
SEC. 205. MODIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION RULES TO PROTECT
OLDER, LONGER SERVICE PARTICIPANTS.
(a) In General.--Section 401 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (o) as subsection (p); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (n) the following new
subsection:
``(o) Special Rules for Applying Nondiscrimination Rules to
Protect Older, Longer Service and Grandfathered Participants
.--
``(1) Testing of defined benefit plans with closed classes
of participants.--
``(A) Benefits, rights, or features provided to closed
classes.--A defined benefit plan which provides benefits,
rights, or features to a closed class of participants shall
not fail to satisfy the requirements of subsection (a)(4) by
reason of the composition of such closed class or the
benefits, rights, or features provided to such closed class,
if--
``(i) for the plan year as of which the class closes and
the 2 succeeding plan years, such benefits, rights, and
features satisfy the requirements of subsection (a)(4)
(without regard to this subparagraph but taking into account
the rules of subparagraph (I)),
``(ii) after the date as of which the class was closed, any
plan amendment which modifies the closed class or the
benefits, rights, and features provided to such closed class
does not discriminate significantly in favor of highly
compensated employees, and
``(iii) the class was closed before April 5, 2017, or the
plan is described in subparagraph (C).
``(B) Aggregate testing with defined contribution plans
permitted on a benefits basis.--
``(i) In general.--For purposes of determining compliance
with subsection (a)(4) and section 410(b), a defined benefit
plan described in clause (iii) may be aggregated and tested
on a benefits basis with 1 or more defined contribution
plans, including with the portion of 1 or more defined
contribution plans which--
``(I) provides matching contributions (as defined in
subsection (m)(4)(A)),
``(II) provides annuity contracts described in section
403(b) which are purchased with matching contributions or
nonelective contributions, or
``(III) consists of an employee stock ownership plan
(within the meaning of section 4975(e)(7)) or a tax credit
employee stock ownership plan (within the meaning of section
409(a)).
``(ii) Special rules for matching contributions.--For
purposes of clause (i), if a defined benefit plan is
aggregated with a portion of a defined contribution plan
providing matching contributions--
``(I) such defined benefit plan must also be aggregated
with any portion of such defined contribution plan which
provides elective deferrals described in subparagraph (A) or
(C) of section 402(g)(3), and
``(II) such matching contributions shall be treated in the
same manner as nonelective contributions, including for
purposes of applying the rules of subsection (l).
``(iii) Plans described.--A defined benefit plan is
described in this clause if--
``(I) the plan provides benefits to a closed class of
participants,
``(II) for the plan year as of which the class closes and
the 2 succeeding plan years, the plan satisfies the
requirements of section 410(b) and subsection (a)(4) (without
regard to this subparagraph but taking into account the rules
of subparagraph (I)),
``(III) after the date as of which the class was closed,
any plan amendment which modifies the closed class or the
benefits provided to such closed class does not discriminate
significantly in favor of highly compensated employees, and
``(IV) the class was closed before April 5, 2017, or the
plan is described in subparagraph (C).
``(C) Plans described.--A plan is described in this
subparagraph if, taking into account any predecessor plan--
``(i) such plan has been in effect for at least 5 years as
of the date the class is closed, and
``(ii) during the 5-year period preceding the date the
class is closed, there has not been a substantial increase in
the coverage or value of the benefits, rights, or features
described in subparagraph (A) or in the coverage or benefits
under the plan described in subparagraph (B)(iii) (whichever
is applicable).
``(D) Determination of substantial increase for benefits,
rights, and features.--In applying subparagraph (C)(ii) for
purposes of subparagraph (A)(iii), a plan shall be treated as
having had a substantial increase in coverage or value of the
benefits, rights, or features described in subparagraph (A)
during the applicable 5-year period only if, during such
period--
``(i) the number of participants covered by such benefits,
rights, or features on the date such period ends is more than
50 percent greater than the number of such participants on
the first day of the plan year in which such period began, or
``(ii) such benefits, rights, and features have been
modified by 1 or more plan amendments in such a way that, as
of the date the class is closed, the value of such benefits,
rights, and features to the closed class as a whole is
substantially greater than the value as of the first day of
such 5-year period, solely as a result of such amendments.
``(E) Determination of substantial increase for aggregate
testing on benefits basis.--In applying subparagraph (C)(ii)
for purposes of subparagraph (B)(iii)(IV), a plan shall be
treated as having had a substantial increase in coverage or
benefits during the applicable 5-year period only if, during
such period--
``(i) the number of participants benefitting under the plan
on the date such period ends is more than 50 percent greater
than the number of such participants on the first day of the
plan year in which such period began, or
``(ii) the average benefit provided to such participants on
the date such period ends is more than 50 percent greater
than the average benefit provided on the first day of the
plan year in which such period began.
``(F) Certain employees disregarded.--For purposes of
subparagraphs (D) and (E), any increase in coverage or value
or in coverage or benefits, whichever is applicable, which is
attributable to such coverage and value or coverage and
benefits provided to employees--
``(i) who became participants as a result of a merger,
acquisition, or similar event which occurred during the 7-
year period preceding the date the class is closed, or
``(ii) who became participants by reason of a merger of the
plan with another plan which had
[[Page H4133]]
been in effect for at least 5 years as of the date of the
merger,
shall be disregarded, except that clause (ii) shall apply for
purposes of subparagraph (D) only if, under the merger, the
benefits, rights, or features under 1 plan are conformed to
the benefits, rights, or features of the other plan
prospectively.
``(G) Rules relating to average benefit.--For purposes of
subparagraph (E)--
``(i) the average benefit provided to participants under
the plan will be treated as having remained the same between
the 2 dates described in subparagraph (E)(ii) if the benefit
formula applicable to such participants has not changed
between such dates, and
``(ii) if the benefit formula applicable to 1 or more
participants under the plan has changed between such 2 dates,
then the average benefit under the plan shall be considered
to have increased by more than 50 percent only if--
``(I) the total amount determined under section
430(b)(1)(A)(i) for all participants benefitting under the
plan for the plan year in which the 5-year period described
in subparagraph (E) ends, exceeds
``(II) the total amount determined under section
430(b)(1)(A)(i) for all such participants for such plan year,
by using the benefit formula in effect for each such
participant for the first plan year in such 5-year period,
by more than 50 percent. In the case of a CSEC plan (as
defined in section 414(y)), the normal cost of the plan (as
determined under section 433(j)(1)(B)) shall be used in lieu
of the amount determined under section 430(b)(1)(A)(i).
``(H) Treatment as single plan.--For purposes of
subparagraphs (E) and (G), a plan described in section 413(c)
shall be treated as a single plan rather than as separate
plans maintained by each employer in the plan.
``(I) Special rules.--For purposes of subparagraphs (A)(i)
and (B)(iii)(II), the following rules shall apply:
``(i) In applying section 410(b)(6)(C), the closing of the
class of participants shall not be treated as a significant
change in coverage under section 410(b)(6)(C)(i)(II).
``(ii) 2 or more plans shall not fail to be eligible to be
aggregated and treated as a single plan solely by reason of
having different plan years.
``(iii) Changes in the employee population shall be
disregarded to the extent attributable to individuals who
become employees or cease to be employees, after the date the
class is closed, by reason of a merger, acquisition,
divestiture, or similar event.
``(iv) Aggregation and all other testing methodologies
otherwise applicable under subsection (a)(4) and section
410(b) may be taken into account.
The rule of clause (ii) shall also apply for purposes of
determining whether plans to which subparagraph (B)(i)
applies may be aggregated and treated as 1 plan for purposes
of determining whether such plans meet the requirements of
subsection (a)(4) and section 410(b).
``(J) Spun-off plans.--For purposes of this paragraph, if a
portion of a defined benefit plan described in subparagraph
(A) or (B)(iii) is spun off to another employer and the spun-
off plan continues to satisfy the requirements of--
``(i) subparagraph (A)(i) or (B)(iii)(II), whichever is
applicable, if the original plan was still within the 3-year
period described in such subparagraph at the time of the spin
off, and
``(ii) subparagraph (A)(ii) or (B)(iii)(III), whichever is
applicable,
the treatment under subparagraph (A) or (B) of the spun-off
plan shall continue with respect to such other employer.
``(2) Testing of defined contribution plans.--
``(A) Testing on a benefits basis.--A defined contribution
plan shall be permitted to be tested on a benefits basis if--
``(i) such defined contribution plan provides make-whole
contributions to a closed class of participants whose
accruals under a defined benefit plan have been reduced or
eliminated,
``(ii) for the plan year of the defined contribution plan
as of which the class eligible to receive such make-whole
contributions closes and the 2 succeeding plan years, such
closed class of participants satisfies the requirements of
section 410(b)(2)(A)(i) (determined by applying the rules of
paragraph (1)(I)),
``(iii) after the date as of which the class was closed,
any plan amendment to the defined contribution plan which
modifies the closed class or the allocations, benefits,
rights, and features provided to such closed class does not
discriminate significantly in favor of highly compensated
employees, and
``(iv) the class was closed before April 5, 2017, or the
defined benefit plan under clause (i) is described in
paragraph (1)(C) (as applied for purposes of paragraph
(1)(B)(iii)(IV)).
``(B) Aggregation with plans including matching
contributions.--
``(i) In general.--With respect to 1 or more defined
contribution plans described in subparagraph (A), for
purposes of determining compliance with subsection (a)(4) and
section 410(b), the portion of such plans which provides
make-whole contributions or other nonelective contributions
may be aggregated and tested on a benefits basis with the
portion of 1 or more other defined contribution plans which--
``(I) provides matching contributions (as defined in
subsection (m)(4)(A)),
``(II) provides annuity contracts described in section
403(b) which are purchased with matching contributions or
nonelective contributions, or
``(III) consists of an employee stock ownership plan
(within the meaning of section 4975(e)(7)) or a tax credit
employee stock ownership plan (within the meaning of section
409(a)).
``(ii) Special rules for matching contributions.--Rules
similar to the rules of paragraph (1)(B)(ii) shall apply for
purposes of clause (i).
``(C) Special rules for testing defined contribution plan
features providing matching contributions to certain older,
longer service participants.--In the case of a defined
contribution plan which provides benefits, rights, or
features to a closed class of participants whose accruals
under a defined benefit plan have been reduced or eliminated,
the plan shall not fail to satisfy the requirements of
subsection (a)(4) solely by reason of the composition of the
closed class or the benefits, rights, or features provided to
such closed class if the defined contribution plan and
defined benefit plan otherwise meet the requirements of
subparagraph (A) but for the fact that the make-whole
contributions under the defined contribution plan are made in
whole or in part through matching contributions.
``(D) Spun-off plans.--For purposes of this paragraph, if a
portion of a defined contribution plan described in
subparagraph (A) or (C) is spun off to another employer, the
treatment under subparagraph (A) or (C) of the spun-off plan
shall continue with respect to the other employer if such
plan continues to comply with the requirements of clauses
(ii) (if the original plan was still within the 3-year period
described in such clause at the time of the spin off) and
(iii) of subparagraph (A), as determined for purposes of
subparagraph (A) or (C), whichever is applicable.
``(3) Definitions and special rule.--For purposes of this
subsection--
``(A) Make-whole contributions.--Except as otherwise
provided in paragraph (2)(C), the term `make-whole
contributions' means nonelective allocations for each
employee in the class which are reasonably calculated, in a
consistent manner, to replace some or all of the retirement
benefits which the employee would have received under the
defined benefit plan and any other plan or qualified cash or
deferred arrangement under subsection (k)(2) if no change had
been made to such defined benefit plan and such other plan or
arrangement. For purposes of the preceding sentence,
consistency shall not be required with respect to employees
who were subject to different benefit formulas under the
defined benefit plan.
``(B) References to closed class of participants.--
References to a closed class of participants and similar
references to a closed class shall include arrangements under
which 1 or more classes of participants are closed, except
that 1 or more classes of participants closed on different
dates shall not be aggregated for purposes of determining the
date any such class was closed.
``(C) Highly compensated employee.--The term `highly
compensated employee' has the meaning given such term in
section 414(q).''.
(b) Participation Requirements.--Paragraph (26) of section
401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(I) Protected participants.--
``(i) In general.--A plan shall be deemed to satisfy the
requirements of subparagraph (A) if--
``(I) the plan is amended--
``(aa) to cease all benefit accruals, or
``(bb) to provide future benefit accruals only to a closed
class of participants,
``(II) the plan satisfies subparagraph (A) (without regard
to this subparagraph) as of the effective date of the
amendment, and
``(III) the amendment was adopted before April 5, 2017, or
the plan is described in clause (ii).
``(ii) Plans described.--A plan is described in this clause
if the plan would be described in subsection (o)(1)(C), as
applied for purposes of subsection (o)(1)(B)(iii)(IV) and by
treating the effective date of the amendment as the date the
class was closed for purposes of subsection (o)(1)(C).
``(iii) Special rules.--For purposes of clause (i)(II), in
applying section 410(b)(6)(C), the amendments described in
clause (i) shall not be treated as a significant change in
coverage under section 410(b)(6)(C)(i)(II).
``(iv) Spun-off plans.--For purposes of this subparagraph,
if a portion of a plan described in clause (i) is spun off to
another employer, the treatment under clause (i) of the spun-
off plan shall continue with respect to the other
employer.''.
(c) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date
of the enactment of this Act, without regard to whether any
plan modifications referred to in such amendments are adopted
or effective before, on, or after such date of enactment.
(2) Special rules.--
(A) Election of earlier application.--At the election of
the plan sponsor, the amendments made by this section shall
apply to plan years beginning after December 31, 2013.
(B) Closed classes of participants.--For purposes of
paragraphs (1)(A)(iii), (1)(B)(iii)(IV), and (2)(A)(iv) of
section 401(o) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added
by this section), a closed class of participants shall be
treated as being closed before April 5, 2017, if the plan
sponsor's intention to create such closed class is reflected
in formal written documents and communicated to participants
before such date.
(C) Certain post-enactment plan amendments.--A plan shall
not be treated as failing to be eligible for the application
of section 401(o)(1)(A), 401(o)(1)(B)(iii), or 401(a)(26) of
such Code (as added by this section) to such plan solely
because in the case of--
(i) such section 401(o)(1)(A), the plan was amended before
the date of the enactment of this Act to eliminate 1 or more
benefits, rights, or features, and is further amended after
such date of enactment to provide such previously eliminated
benefits, rights, or features to a closed class of
participants, or
[[Page H4134]]
(ii) such section 401(o)(1)(B)(iii) or section 401(a)(26),
the plan was amended before the date of the enactment of this
Act to cease all benefit accruals, and is further amended
after such date of enactment to provide benefit accruals to a
closed class of participants.
Any such section shall only apply if the plan otherwise meets
the requirements of such section and in applying such
section, the date the class of participants is closed shall
be the effective date of the later amendment.
SEC. 206. MODIFICATION OF PBGC PREMIUMS FOR CSEC PLANS.
(a) Flat Rate Premium.--Subparagraph (A) of section
4006(a)(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974 (29 U.S.C. 1306(a)(3)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``plan,'' and inserting
``plan other than a CSEC plan (as defined in section
210(f)(1))'';
(2) in clause (v), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(3) in clause (vi), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``, or''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(vii) in the case of a CSEC plan (as defined in section
210(f)(1)), for plan years beginning after December 31, 2018,
for each individual who is a participant in such plan during
the plan year an amount equal to the sum of--
``(I) the additional premium (if any) determined under
subparagraph (E), and
``(II) $19.''.
(b) Variable Rate Premium.--
(1) Unfunded vested benefits.--
(A) In general.--Subparagraph (E) of section 4006(a)(3) of
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29
U.S.C. 1306(a)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new clause:
``(v) For purposes of clause (ii), in the case of a CSEC
plan (as defined in section 210(f)(1)), the term `unfunded
vested benefits' means, for plan years beginning after
December 31, 2018, the excess (if any) of--
``(I) the funding liability of the plan as determined under
section 306(j)(5)(C) for the plan year by only taking into
account vested benefits, over
``(II) the fair market value of plan assets for the plan
year which are held by the plan on the valuation date.''.
(B) Conforming amendment.--Clause (iii) of section
4006(a)(3)(E) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 1306(a)(3)(E)) is
amended by striking ``For purposes'' and inserting ``Except
as provided in clause (v), for purposes''.
(2) Applicable dollar amount.--
(A) In general.--Paragraph (8) of section 4006(a) of such
Act (29 U.S.C. 1306(a)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subparagraph:
``(E) CSEC plans.--In the case of a CSEC plan (as defined
in section 210(f)(1)), the applicable dollar amount shall be
$9.''.
(B) Conforming amendment.--Subparagraph (A) of section
4006(a)(8) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 1306(a)(8)) is amended by
striking ``(B) and (C)'' and inserting ``(B), (C), and (E)''.
TITLE III--OTHER BENEFITS
SEC. 301. BENEFITS PROVIDED TO VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS AND
EMERGENCY MEDICAL RESPONDERS.
(a) Increase in Dollar Limitation on Qualified Payments.--
Subparagraph (B) of section 139B(c)(2) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``$30'' and
inserting ``$50''.
(b) Extension.--Section 139B(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``beginning after
December 31, 2010.'' and inserting ``beginning--
``(1) after December 31, 2010, and before January 1, 2020,
or
``(2) after December 31, 2020.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2019.
SEC. 302. EXPANSION OF SECTION 529 PLANS.
(a) Distributions for Certain Expenses Associated With
Registered Apprenticeship Programs.--Section 529(c) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end
the following new paragraph:
``(8) Treatment of certain expenses associated with
registered apprenticeship programs.--Any reference in this
subsection to the term `qualified higher education expense'
shall include a reference to expenses for fees, books,
supplies, and equipment required for the participation of a
designated beneficiary in an apprenticeship program
registered and certified with the Secretary of Labor under
section 1 of the National Apprenticeship Act (29 U.S.C.
50).''
(c) Distributions for Qualified Education Loan
Repayments.--
(1) In general.--Section 529(c) of such Code, as amended by
subsection (a), is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(9) Treatment of qualified education loan repayments.--
``(A) In general.--Any reference in this subsection to the
term `qualified higher education expense' shall include a
reference to amounts paid as principal or interest on any
qualified education loan (as defined in section 221(d)) of
the designated beneficiary or a sibling of the designated
beneficiary.
``(B) Limitation.--The amount of distributions treated as a
qualified higher education expense under this paragraph with
respect to the loans of any individual shall not exceed
$10,000 (reduced by the amount of distributions so treated
for all prior taxable years).
``(C) Special rules for siblings of the designated
beneficiary.--
``(i) Separate accounting.--For purposes of subparagraph
(B) and subsection (d), amounts treated as a qualified higher
education expense with respect to the loans of a sibling of
the designated beneficiary shall be taken into account with
respect to such sibling and not with respect to such
designated beneficiary.
``(ii) Sibling defined.--For purposes of this paragraph,
the term `sibling' means an individual who bears a
relationship to the designated beneficiary which is described
in section 152(d)(2)(B).''.
(2) Coordination with deduction for student loan
interest.--Section 221(e)(1) of such Code is amended by
adding at the end the following: ``The deduction otherwise
allowable under subsection (a) (prior to the application of
subsection (b)) to the taxpayer for any taxable year shall be
reduced (but not below zero) by so much of the distributions
treated as a qualified higher education expense under section
529(c)(9) with respect to loans of the taxpayer as would be
includible in gross income under section 529(c)(3)(A) for
such taxable year but for such treatment.''.
(e) Effective Dates.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to distributions made after December 31, 2018.
TITLE IV--REVENUE PROVISIONS
SEC. 401. MODIFICATION OF REQUIRED DISTRIBUTION RULES FOR
DESIGNATED BENEFICIARIES.
(a) Modification of Rules Where Employee Dies Before Entire
Distribution.--
(1) In general.--Section 401(a)(9) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph
``(H) Special rules for certain defined contribution
plans.--In the case of a defined contribution plan, if an
employee dies before the distribution of the employee's
entire interest--
``(i) In general.--Except in the case of a beneficiary who
is not a designated beneficiary, subparagraph (B)(ii)--
``(I) shall be applied by substituting `10 years' for `5
years', and
``(II) shall apply whether or not distributions of the
employee's interests have begun in accordance with
subparagraph (A).
``(ii) Exception only for eligible designated
beneficiaries.--Subparagraph (B)(iii) shall apply only in the
case of an eligible designated beneficiary.
``(iii) Rules upon death of eligible designated
beneficiary.--If an eligible designated beneficiary dies
before the portion of the employee's interest to which this
subparagraph applies is entirely distributed, the exception
under clause (iii) shall not apply to any beneficiary of such
eligible designated beneficiary and the remainder of such
portion shall be distributed within 10 years after the death
of such eligible designated beneficiary.
``(iv) Application to certain eligible retirement plans.--
For purposes of applying the provisions of this subparagraph
in determining amounts required to be distributed pursuant to
this paragraph, all eligible retirement plans (as defined in
section 402(c)(8)(B), other than a defined benefit plan
described in clause (iv) or (v) thereof or a qualified trust
which is a part of a defined benefit plan) shall be treated
as a defined contribution plan.''.
(2) Definition of eligible designated beneficiary.--Section
401(a)(9)(E) of such Code is amended to read as follows:
``(E) Definitions and rules relating to designated
beneficiary.--For purposes of this paragraph--
``(i) Designated beneficiary.--The term `designated
beneficiary' means any individual designated as a beneficiary
by the employee.
``(ii) Eligible designated beneficiary.--The term `eligible
designated beneficiary' means, with respect to any employee,
any designated beneficiary who is--
``(I) the surviving spouse of the employee,
``(II) subject to clause (iii), a child of the employee who
has not reached majority (within the meaning of subparagraph
(F)),
``(III) disabled (within the meaning of section 72(m)(7)),
``(IV) a chronically ill individual (within the meaning of
section 7702B(c)(2), except that the requirements of
subparagraph (A)(i) thereof shall only be treated as met if
there is a certification that, as of such date, the period of
inability described in such subparagraph with respect to the
individual is an indefinite one which is reasonably expected
to be lengthy in nature), or
``(V) an individual not described in any of the preceding
subclauses who is not more than 10 years younger than the
employee.
``(iii) Special rule for children.--Subject to subparagraph
(F), an individual described in clause (ii)(II) shall cease
to be an eligible designated beneficiary as of the date the
individual reaches majority and any remainder of the portion
of the individual's interest to which subparagraph (H)(ii)
applies shall be distributed within 10 years after such date.
``(iv) Time for determination of eligible designated
beneficiary.--The determination of whether a designated
beneficiary is an eligible designated beneficiary shall be
made as of the date of death of the employee.''.
(3) Effective dates.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in this paragraph and
paragraphs (4) and (5), the amendments made by this
subsection shall apply to distributions with respect to
employees who die after December 31, 2019.
(B) Collective bargaining exception.--In the case of a plan
maintained pursuant to 1 or more collective bargaining
agreements between employee representatives and 1 or more
employers ratified before the date of enactment of this Act,
the amendments made by this subsection shall apply to
distributions with respect to employees who die in calendar
years beginning after the earlier of--
(i) the later of--
(I) the date on which the last of such collective
bargaining agreements terminates (determined without regard
to any extension thereof agreed to on or after the date of
the enactment of this Act), or
[[Page H4135]]
(II) December 31, 2019, or
(ii) December 31, 2021.
For purposes of clause (i)(I), any plan amendment made
pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement relating to the
plan which amends the plan solely to conform to any
requirement added by this section shall not be treated as a
termination of such collective bargaining agreement.
(C) Governmental plans.--In the case of a governmental plan
(as defined in section 414(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986), subparagraph (A) shall be applied by substituting
``December 31, 2021'' for ``December 31, 2019''.
(4) Exception for certain existing annuity contracts.--
(A) In general.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall not apply to a qualified annuity which is a binding
annuity contract in effect on the date of enactment of this
Act and at all times thereafter.
(B) Qualified annuity.--For purposes of this paragraph, the
term ``qualified annuity'' means, with respect to an
employee, an annuity--
(i) which is a commercial annuity (as defined in section
3405(e)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986);
(ii) under which the annuity payments are made over the
life of the employee or over the joint lives of such employee
and a designated beneficiary (or over a period not extending
beyond the life expectancy of such employee or the joint life
expectancy of such employee and a designated beneficiary) in
accordance with the regulations described in section
401(a)(9)(A)(ii) of such Code (as in effect before such
amendments) and which meets the other requirements of section
401(a)(9) of such Code (as so in effect) with respect to such
payments; and
(iii) with respect to which--
(I) annuity payments to the employee have begun before the
date of enactment of this Act, and the employee has made an
irrevocable election before such date as to the method and
amount of the annuity payments to the employee or any
designated beneficiaries; or
(II) if subclause (I) does not apply, the employee has made
an irrevocable election before the date of enactment of this
Act as to the method and amount of the annuity payments to
the employee or any designated beneficiaries.
(5) Exception for certain beneficiaries.--
(A) In general.--If an employee dies before the effective
date, then, in applying the amendments made by this
subsection to such employee's designated beneficiary who dies
after such date--
(i) such amendments shall apply to any beneficiary of such
designated beneficiary; and
(ii) the designated beneficiary shall be treated as an
eligible designated beneficiary for purposes of applying
section 401(a)(9)(H)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(as in effect after such amendments).
(B) Effective date.--For purposes of this paragraph, the
term ``effective date'' means the first day of the first
calendar year to which the amendments made by this subsection
apply to a plan with respect to employees dying on or after
such date.
(b) Provisions Relating to Plan Amendments.--
(1) In general.--If this subsection applies to any plan
amendment--
(A) such plan shall be treated as being operated in
accordance with the terms of the plan during the period
described in paragraph (2)(B)(i); and
(B) except as provided by the Secretary of the Treasury,
such plan shall not fail to meet the requirements of section
411(d)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and section
204(g) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
by reason of such amendment.
(2) Amendments to which subsection applies.--
(A) In general.--This subsection shall apply to any
amendment to any plan or which is made--
(i) pursuant to any amendment made by this section or
pursuant to any regulation issued by the Secretary of the
Treasury under this section or such amendments; and
(ii) on or before the last day of the first plan year
beginning after December 31, 2021, or such later date as the
Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe.
In the case of a governmental or collectively bargained plan
to which subparagraph (B) or (C) of subsection (a)(4)
applies, clause (ii) shall be applied by substituting the
date which is 2 years after the date otherwise applied under
such clause.
(B) Conditions.--This subsection shall not apply to any
amendment unless--
(i) during the period--
(I) beginning on the date the legislative or regulatory
amendment described in paragraph (1)(A) takes effect (or in
the case of a plan amendment not required by such legislative
or regulatory amendment, the effective date specified by the
plan); and
(II) ending on the date described in subparagraph (A)(ii)
(or, if earlier, the date the plan amendment is adopted),
the plan is operated as if such plan amendment were in
effect; and
(ii) such plan amendment applies retroactively for such
period.
SEC. 402. INCREASE IN PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO FILE.
(a) In General.--The second sentence of subsection (a) of
section 6651 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended
by striking ``$205'' and inserting ``$400''.
(b) Inflation Adjustment.--Section 6651(j)(1) of such Code
is amended by striking ``$205'' and inserting ``$400''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to returns the due date for which (including
extensions) is after December 31, 2019.
SEC. 403. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO FILE RETIREMENT
PLAN RETURNS.
(a) In General.--Subsection (e) of section 6652 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``$25'' and inserting ``$250''; and
(2) by striking ``$15,000'' and inserting ``$150,000''.
(b) Annual Registration Statement and Notification of
Changes.--Subsection (d) of section 6652 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``$1'' both places it appears in paragraphs
(1) and (2) and inserting ``$10'';
(2) by striking ``$5,000'' in paragraph (1) and inserting
``$50,000''; and
(3) by striking ``$1,000'' in paragraph (2) and inserting
``$10,000''.
(c) Failure To Provide Notice.--Subsection (h) of section
6652 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``$10'' and inserting ``$100''; and
(2) by striking ``$5,000'' and inserting ``$50,000''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to returns, statements, and notifications
required to be filed, and notices required to be provided,
after December 31, 2019.
SEC. 404. INCREASE INFORMATION SHARING TO ADMINISTER EXCISE
TAXES.
(a) In General.--Section 6103(o) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(3) Taxes imposed by section 4481.--Returns and return
information with respect to taxes imposed by section 4481
shall be open to inspection by or disclosure to officers and
employees of United States Customs and Border Protection of
the Department of Homeland Security whose official duties
require such inspection or disclosure for purposes of
administering such section.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Paragraph (4) of section
6103(p) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
striking ``or (o)(1)(A)'' each place it appears and inserting
``, (o)(1)(A), or (o)(3)''.
TITLE V--TAX RELIEF FOR CERTAIN CHILDREN
SEC. 501. MODIFICATION OF RULES RELATING TO THE TAXATION OF
UNEARNED INCOME OF CERTAIN CHILDREN.
(a) In General.--Section 1(j) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 is amended by striking paragraph (4).
(b) Coordination With Alternative Minimum Tax.--Section
55(d)(4)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended
by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (i)(II), by striking
the period at the end of clause (ii)(III) and inserting ``,
and'', and by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iii) subsection (j) of section 59 shall not apply.''.
(c) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, the amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2018.
(2) Coordination with alternative minimum tax.--The
amendment made by subsection (b) shall apply to taxable years
beginning after December 31, 2017.
(3) Elective retroactive application.--In the case of a
taxpayer who elects the application of this paragraph (at
such time and in such manner as the Secretary of the Treasury
(or the Secretary's designee) may provide), the amendment
made by subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years beginning
after December 31, 2017.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for
1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) and the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Brady) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
General Leave
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
to insert extraneous material on H.R. 1994.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1994, the Setting Every
Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act, or the SECURE Act. This is
the most substantive promotion of retirement savings in the last 15
years, and we all should be pleased that we are part of it this
morning.
One of my priorities since becoming chairman of the Ways and Means
Committee has been helping American workers of all ages prepare for a
financially secure retirement, so I am particularly pleased to be
bringing this legislation to the floor this morning.
I also am very proud of the fact that I was able to collaborate with
Ranking
[[Page H4136]]
Member Kevin Brady and our Republican colleagues in drafting this
legislation. Both Republicans and Democrats have wins in this bill, and
I would like to thank Mr. Brady this morning for all of his hard work
in helping me to write this legislation.
Unfortunately, currently, Americans face a retirement income crisis
with too many people in danger of not having enough in retirement to
maintain their standard of living and avoid sliding into poverty.
Social Security benefits are modest; employer-sponsored pensions are
disappearing; and too many people find it difficult to save for
retirement. According to a recent study, one-third of American workers
believe that they will either face a significant financial hardship
during retirement or, in fact, will never retire. And the 2018 study
found that almost two-thirds of workers have no retirement account
assets.
{time} 0915
The SECURE Act, which the Ways and Means Committee approved with
unanimous, bipartisan votes, goes a long way in addressing this problem
by making it easier for Americans to save.
For example, the SECURE Act includes a small employer automatic
enrollment credit. Automatic enrollment is shown to increase employee
participation and retirement savings opportunities. Our bill creates a
new tax credit of up to $500 per year for employers to defray the
startup costs for new 401(k) plans that include automatic enrollment.
The SECURE Act also increases the age for required minimum
distributions from 70\1/2\ to 72. This age hasn't been adjusted since
the 1960s. With Americans working longer, this will encourage them to
continue saving.
The SECURE Act also allows long-term, part-time employees to
participate in their employer's 401(k) plans. Women are more likely to
work part-time than men, so this legislation is particularly important
for women.
Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Murphy for her leadership here.
The bill would also make it easier for small businesses to offer
retirement plans to their employees by eliminating outdated barriers to
the use of multiple employer plans. As a result of this provision, it
is estimated that 600,000 to 700,000 new retirement opportunities will
be formed.
All of these are important, commonsense proposals that will improve
our retirement system.
I also note that this bill has tremendous support from a diverse
group of stakeholders: AARP, SEIU, the Women's Institute for a Secure
Retirement, Church Alliance, the Girl Scouts, the Boy Scouts, and the
National Rural Electric Cooperative.
Finally, Madam Speaker, I want to highlight a provision that fixes an
urgent problem affecting children of our fallen troops and first
responders. Due to changes included in the Republicans' tax law, the
amount of tax imposed on survivor benefits for children of veterans,
Active Duty servicemembers, and emergency personnel increased
significantly.
This bill eliminates that tax increase by repealing those changes. It
also makes sure that all similar payments, like Tribal government
payments to children, payments out of the Alaska Permanent Fund, and
certain scholarships and fellowship grants will not be subject to this
unexpected and unfair tax treatment.
These fixes could not have been accomplished without Mrs. Luria's
leadership on behalf of our troops, along with many Members on both
sides of the aisle who supported her efforts.
We should recognize Ms. Moore's leadership on Tribal payments and Mr.
Horsford's leadership on the scholarship issue.
I am very proud that we were able to put together a bill that will
help American families prepare for a financially secure retirement, and
that it was done on a bipartisan basis, which we will acknowledge as
the morning moves on, with significant stakeholder support.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1994, the SECURE
Act, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, for nearly 2 years, Republicans have been advocating
for policies that help our families and Main Street businesses save
more and save earlier for the future.
Following the historic rewrite of our Tax Code, Republicans knew the
Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was only step one. We knew that we changed the
trajectory of our economy with our reforms.
Today in America, we are growing 50 percent faster than the Obama
administration projected. Wages are surging for blue-collar workers and
low-income workers for the first time in a decade, and our job market
continues to be the envy of the world.
These are all encouraging signs, and Republicans are committed to
building on this success for years to come, which is why last year, we
set out to change the culture in Washington, where we only do, it
seems, tax reform once a generation.
In Tax Reform 2.0, we passed three bills that offered permanent tax
relief for families and small businesses, sparked American innovation,
and went further and enhanced retirement and savings vehicles for our
workers and our local, mainstream businesses.
That effort, the Family Savings Act, was led by Representative Mike
Kelly.
Those reforms passed on a bipartisan basis, and our retirement
proposals passed the U.S. House of Representatives not once but twice.
Unfortunately, time ran out on the calendar before we were able to
get these reforms to the President's desk. But I was greatly encouraged
earlier this year when Chairman Neal reached out to say he was
committed to getting retirement-focused legislation signed into law
this year. This area, retirement savings, is one that Chairman Neal has
worked on for much of his career.
Right away, he and I, and many members of our committee worked
together to develop the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement
Enhancement Act, the SECURE Act, we debate today.
The SECURE Act builds well on the work that Republicans have
championed throughout this Congress and the last. Our bipartisan
legislation makes it easier for Main Street businesses to offer
retirement plans for their workers by making it simpler, easing
administrative burdens, and cutting down on unnecessary and often
costly paperwork.
We make it easier for them to join together to pool their resources
to offer these plans. We offer local businesses the flexibility to
tailor retirement plans to best fit their workers, not necessarily what
Washington may need.
Additionally, our reforms help Americans not only save earlier in
their careers, but it helps families save longer, as well.
We know for a fact that people are choosing to work longer today than
in previous generations. Our Tax Code should reflect that, which is why
we make smart, needed changes to reflect today's workforce.
First, the age limit for contributing to IRAs is removed, as it
should be.
Second, we increase the minimum age for forcing people to spend their
savings from 70\1/2\ to 72 years of age. My hope is, someday, we can we
remove it completely. We want Americans to save throughout their
lifetime and use those savings when they need it most, not when
Washington needs it.
This legislation is prowork and, equally as important, our bill is
also profamily.
For the first time, we allow what we call the new baby savings
provision. We allow parents to access their own retirement accounts on
a penalty-free basis to use when welcoming a new child into their
homes, whether by birth or adoption. This works well for working
parents and stay-at-home parents, as well. It is allowed to be used for
the things you need, whether it is medical equipment, medical expenses,
or if you need to spend time at home with your new child in those
opening weeks. We know all that is so important.
The bill also expands 529 plans to make sure you can use, tax-free,
your savings for apprenticeships or to pay down college debt.
Our legislation lowers taxes for Gold Star families, ensuring that
children of our fallen heroes have the certainty they deserve. This
provision was first made public in 2014 in a draft that was widely
praised by Democrats and Republicans alike.
[[Page H4137]]
It was brought to us by the Joint Committee on Taxation to make it
simpler for families to file their kids' taxes and also to close some
tax loopholes for the wealthy. Unfortunately, over 5 years, with
scrutiny by both parties, tax experts, and the Joint Committee on
Taxation, we still did not see one unintended consequence.
In this bill, we worked together, Republicans and Democrats, to make
sure we honor our Gold Star families.
The time is right for these reforms. Workers' paychecks are rising;
inflation is low; and businesses are expanding. What better opportunity
to help folks save for the future?
Chairman Neal deserves a great deal of credit. The bill we brought to
the Rules Committee earlier this week cleared our committee nearly
unanimously. Members of the Progressive Caucus, Freedom Caucus, New
Democrats, Problem Solvers, and Republican Study Committee, we all
voted ``yes'' on these reforms.
This is a rare occurrence in Washington, and it speaks to what a
committee can accomplish when we work together on reforms to positively
impact our families and economy.
I have to admit, it is incredibly troubling that special interests--
in this case, teachers unions--forced changes on our bipartisan bill
for absolutely no good reason at the eleventh hour.
These special interest groups forced Democrats to block two
provisions.
One allows parents to use their educational savings tax-free for the
expenses of homeschooling. Nearly 2.5 million families use parent-
centered, child-centered homeschooling as the best way for their
children to reach their potential. It is all types of Americans and
becoming more mainstream. It is Christians and Jews and Muslims. It is
all races. It is parents whose kids are exceptionally bright and
parents whose kids have learning disabilities and severe special needs.
That is why that was in the bill.
The second provision that was blocked would allow families with kids
in grades kindergarten through 12 to use savings for books, tutors, and
educational therapies for students who may need it, such as those with
learning disabilities. How many of us in this Chamber have kids with
special needs and learning disabilities, some with mental and physical
challenges? This would have allowed our parents to save tax-free and to
help their kids with the special tools they need to reach their full
potential.
I want to talk a little more about this in the future, but my bottom
line is that backdoor deals made in the dead of night without
bipartisan knowledge or support are not the way to do business.
Nonetheless, as we begin the debate on this bill, I am very
encouraged by the underlying bill we have in front of us. It will
greatly benefit our workers. It deserves strong support, and I am
asking my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support these
reforms.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the
Church Alliance.
Church Alliance,
April 1, 2019.
Hon. Richard Neal,
Chairman, House Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, DC.
Hon. Kevin Brady,
Ranking Member, House Committee on Ways and Means,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Ron Kind,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Mike Kelly,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Neal, Ranking Member Brady, Congressman Kind
and Congressman Kelly: The Church Alliance expresses our deep
gratitude for inclusion of a provision to clarify that all
church-affiliated organizations are able to participate in
church 403(b)(9) retirement plans in the recently introduced
Setting Every Community up for Retirement Enhancement
(SECURE) Act of 2019 (H.R. 1994). We are grateful for the
tremendous bipartisan work that has been done over the past
several years on retirement reform, and are hopeful Congress
will swiftly pass this legislation to ensure retirement
security for clergy, lay workers and their families across
the United States.
The Church Alliance is a coalition of the chief executive
officers of 37 church benefits boards which are affiliated
with mainline and evangelical Protestant denominations, three
Jewish groups, and some Catholic schools and institutions.
Church Alliance members provide employee benefits to
approximately one million clergy, lay workers, and their
families, serving over 155,000 churches, synagogues, and
affiliated organizations such as schools, colleges and
universities, nursing homes, children's homes, homeless
shelters, food banks, and other ministries.
Section 110 of the SECURE Act seeks to clarify a recent
positron by the Treasury Department and IRS to disregard more
than 30 years of practice, precedent, and clear statutory
language to bar employees of certain church-affiliated
organizations from participating in retirement income account
plans offered under section 403(b)(9) of the Tax Code. As a
result, employees of church-related nursing homes, daycare
centers, summer camps, preschools, colleges, universities,
hospitals, and other social service organizations stand to
lose access to the unique plan features they have come to
depend upon. In addition, the Treasury and IRS position would
cause church 403(b)(9) plans to incur significant transition
costs, which would unfortunately siphon resources away from
our core mission of supporting clergy and church lay workers
and lead to higher costs for these plan participants.
We are encouraged by the introduction of the SECURE Act and
its upcoming markup on April 2. We hope the House votes on
passage of this important legislation as soon as possible. On
behalf of the Church Alliance, thank you for your
consideration of and attention to this important matter. We
look forward to continuing to work with you to promote the
retirement security of people of faith nationwide.
Sincerely,
James F. (Jim) Sanft,
Chair of the Church Alliance.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thompson), who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on
Select Revenue Measures.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the SECURE Act. I thank
the chairman, Mr. Neal, and Speaker Pelosi for their leadership on this
important bill.
America is facing a retirement crisis. Nearly half of all the people
in America do not have any money saved for retirement. The SECURE Act
before us today helps fix that.
I am glad we could reach this bipartisan solution to make it easier
for workers, including home healthcare workers in California, to take
advantage of important retirement savings tools.
As a combat veteran and the father of two first responders, I
understand how important it is that this bill also reverses the harmful
tax hikes included in the Republican tax bill on survivor benefits.
Hiking taxes on Gold Star families and families of first responders is
unjust, and it insults how sacred these benefits are. It is just plain
wrong. This bill reverses that harmful provision.
Madam Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Luria for her leadership in this
effort.
Madam Speaker, I ask that all my colleagues join me in support of
this very important bill.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly), who has helped lead many of these retirement
reforms.
Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I thank Ranking Member
Brady for yielding. I am so used to calling him chairman, but I look
across the aisle to my great friend Richard Neal, who is chairman right
now, and I thank him so much for bringing this up today.
Madam Speaker, I enter into the Record a letter in support of the
SECURE Act from AARP.
AARP,
May 22, 2019.
Dear Representative: On behalf of our nearly 38 million
members and all older Americans, AARP supports the Setting
Every Community Up for Retirement Act of 2019 (SECURE Act).
The SECURE Act contains a number of provisions that will
improve both access and levels of coverage in employer-
sponsored retirement savings plans. The legislation would
enhance tax credits for employers that offer retirement plans
with automatic enrollment and encourage more adequate
deferral amounts. The legislation would also make it easier
for small businesses to offer employees an automatic savings
option through a multiple employer pension plan--a single
plan in which a pooled provider assumes the primary fiduciary
duties, making it easier for smaller employers to join
together to offer a retirement plan to their workers.
Another important component of the SECURE Act is the
expansion of access to retirement savings plans for part-time
workers. There are more than 27 million part-time workers in
the U.S., including more
[[Page H4138]]
than seven million Americans age 55 and older. According to
AARP research, 38 percent of those age 25 to 49 and 26
percent of those age 50 to 64 who work part-time do so
because of caregiving responsibilities--either for children
or an adult loved one. Helping these workers save for
retirement through a workplace savings plan would be
important for their long-term financial security. The bill
would be especially helpful to both caregivers and older
workers who shift from full-time to part time status.
The bill would also give workers more information to
prepare for retirement as well as protections to safeguard
their hard-earned savings. It would require that workers'
benefit statements add a lifetime income disclosure so that
the statements show not just a lump sum, but the monthly
value of their savings at retirement. Seniors would also be
able to delay the required draw down of retirement savings
until age 72, giving them more time to accumulate savings.
The bill would also clarify rules on how employers and plans
may select appropriate lifetime income payments. It is
important to retain strong fiduciary law protections that
ensure all retirement plan decisions, including for pooled
plans and annuity selections, are made solely in the interest
of participants and beneficiaries.
We urge you to vote YES on the SECURE Act, and look forward
to working with you to enact legislation to enhance the
ability of American workers to save for a secure retirement.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me, or
have your staff contact Michele Varnhagen on our Government
Affairs staff.
Sincerely,
Nancy A. LeaMond,
Executive Vice President and
Chief Advocacy and Engagement Officer.
Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, this is an unusual day. In
many cases, it is providential, as we look on the eve of the time that
we take to honor our fallen war dead.
Some people confuse it with the beginning of summer or the opening of
our swimming pools. It has nothing to do with that.
But the fact that we can talk today about the SECURE Act--and when
you talk about ``secure,'' what does ``secure'' mean? It means giving
you certainty, making you assured, and making something reliable,
something dependable, something that is fixed, something that is
established, and something that is solid and sound.
What we are doing today is acting in the best interests of the
American people. We are doing it in the people's House at a time when
the rest of the Nation looks at us and asks, ``Isn't there anything
they can do together to help the American people?''
When I go home, I say, yes, there is. I have a great friend from
Wisconsin, Ron Kind, and we feel the same way. I talked with Mr. Brady
about it, and we feel the same way. I have talked with Mr. Neal about
it, and we feel the same way.
Today's effort is adding security in retirement years for every
American, the opportunity to go into those golden years with a little
gold in their pockets so that they can get through it, giving them
peace of mind in being able to lay their heads on the pillows at night
feeling safe and secure, knowing that they have prepared for their
retirements.
There are many other pieces to this bill. We have talked about the
provisions to the Gold Star program. So if something was wrong, we made
it right.
The 529 programs give people the opportunity to actually save and
allocate money for the education of their children.
{time} 0930
It may not be in a 4-year college. Maybe it is a vocational
opportunity. But it is there. It is their money, and they should be
able to use it the way they want to use it.
I just said earlier about it being providential, and I mean that
sincerely. There will be a few times today that the American people
will look at us and say: They really have our best interests at heart.
They really go to work every day thinking that they are not
representing themselves but representing us, the American people.
When I look at this piece of legislation, I know how hard we worked
with the chairman to get it through in the past sessions. We almost got
it there but didn't quite get it there.
Madam Speaker, I say to Chairman Neal, we are getting there. We are
getting there. And I say to Mr. Kind, we are getting there.
I just think that it is such a fantastic opportunity to show the
American people who we really are and what we really do and where our
hearts really lie.
There are so many people who worked on this. Also, the staff. I thank
Kara for doing the work that she has done. I always call her my girl
Friday. In our office, Lori Prater. They all work so closely together.
I wish the American people could see the camaraderie, could see how
well we work together, and could understand that our concerns and their
concerns are the same.
I am saying today that the SECURE Act gives us that opportunity. The
time for the American people and retired people is just beginning, and
we have blue skies and strong winds on our backs.
Madam Speaker, I wish everybody the best Memorial Day ever, and let's
not forget our fallen heroes.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, that is one of those moments when I didn't
mind the gentleman's time running over.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter of support from
diverse coalitions across the country, including the Girl Scouts, the
Jewish Federation, the Boy Scouts of America, the Christian Schools
International, The Rural Broadband Association, and the National
Council of Farmer Cooperatives.
April 1, 2019.
Charities & Co-ops Endorse ``SECURE Act'' Retirement Package--Stops
PBGC From Grossly Overcharging Our Pension Plans
We endorse the bipartisan ``SECURE Act'' retirement package
introduced by Ways & Means Chairman Richard Neal (D-MA),
Ranking Member Kevin Brady (R-TX), and Reps. Ron Kind (D-WI)
and Mike Kelly (R-PA). The ``SECURE Act'' stops the Pension
Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC) from grossly overcharging
``Cooperative and Small Employer Charity'' defined benefit
pension plans, i.e., plans covering multiple charities or
rural cooperatives (``CSEC Plans'') by including critical
provisions of H.R. 1007, the ``Retirement Enhancement and
Savings Act'' and H.R. 1993, the ``Providing Retirement
Security to Workers in Small Businesses, Cooperatives, and
Service Organizations Act'' championed by Reps. Kind and
Kelly.
Our core missions are to provide food, electricity,
broadband, and other necessities of life, educate and empower
children, care for the most vulnerable, and promote the
sustainable development of the communities in which our
millions of members, volunteers and beneficiaries live.
However, current PBGC rules designed for large ``single-
employer'' for-profit companies inappropriately require us to
divert scarce resources from our core missions. These bills
fix this inequity permanently.
The same facts that led Congress to adjust funding rules
for CSEC Plans in 2014 strongly support adjusting PBGC
premiums charged to CSEC Plans today. (See Cooperative and
Small Employer Charity Pension Flexibility Act of 2014 (Pub.
L. No. 113-97). It does not make sense for CSEC Plans to be
subject to premiums designed for large ``single-employer''
for-profit companies.
It's time to stop forcing charities and not-for-profit
cooperatives to subsidize the PBGC premiums of large
``single-employer'' companies. PBGC's own data supports
reducing premiums for CSEC Plans; in fact, PBGC projects
making more than a 3,000 percent return on CSEC plans for the
2014-2018 period.
Congress should include these provisions in any retirement
package sent to the President's desk.
Girl Scouts of the USA; UJA--Federation of New York, Inc.;
National Rural Electric Cooperative Assoc.; Boy Scouts of
America; United Benefits Group; NTCA--The Rural Broadband
Association; The Jewish Federations of North America;
Christian Schools International; Jewish United Fund/Jewish
Federation of Metropolitan Chicago; Hawkeye Insurance
Association; National Council of Farmer Cooperatives.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I acknowledge the good work that Mr. Kelly
and Mr. Kind did on one very important amendment on this as well.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Pascrell).
Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Speaker, after years and years of prior
Congresses thinking that tax policy was giving cuts to the rich, this
bill uses our Tax Code for some good.
As the gentleman, my good friend from Pennsylvania, just said, we can
work together, we can walk and chew gum at the same time, we can have
oversight and have issues come up, and we join together for the
American people. Whoever thinks otherwise doesn't know history and is
not reading the papers every day.
Retirement should be about one thing: security. If you have spent
your life working your tail off, you have the right to be able to relax
without fear.
But, today, millions of Americans--millions--are afraid they are
entering or are in retirement and don't have the resources they need to
live. Many live on a Social Security check. They struggle to enjoy
their best years.
[[Page H4139]]
Employees deserve benefits, and employers need incentives to provide
them. This legislation does both. It provides flexibility to 401(k)s to
give employees and small businesses better access; it creates a tax
credit for employers; and it creates a tax credit for employers that
build automatic enrollment plans.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman.
Mr. PASCRELL. By passing this bill, we would finally repeal the
maximum age for IRA contributions, something I have worked on for many
years.
This bill cleared out of our committee unanimously. That is pretty
rare. It is as rare as a unicorn. That tells you how commonsense the
bill is.
I am glad that this bill eliminates an unfair tax, a tax increase on
the benefits of children and Gold Star military families that was
caused by the tax bill of 2017. This was a crushing blow to many
families.
Madam Speaker, it is fitting that the House will make this fix before
Memorial Day.
I encourage my colleagues to support the SECURE Act.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Holding), a key member of the Ways
and Means Committee.
Mr. HOLDING. Madam Speaker, this past Saturday, I had the great
pleasure of addressing a number of homeschool graduates in Cary, North
Carolina, 55 of them, in fact.
I was impressed by these students, and I was inspired by their
parents, who have made so many sacrifices and who have dedicated
immeasurable time to ensuring their kids get a good education.
Today, we were supposed to be voting on legislation that would help
homeschoolers. Tens of millions of Americans choose 529 savings plans
to cover K-12 expenses. This money can be used for public schools,
private schools, and religious schools, but it cannot be used to cover
homeschool expenses.
This bill was supposed to fix this inequity by enabling homeschool
parents to use their 529 savings plans. This would help erase and ease
the financial burden on homeschool parents and give homeschoolers the
same opportunities and resources enjoyed by other kids who go to
private and public schools.
As Chairman Neal said, Republicans and Democrats on the Ways and
Means Committee came together, passed this bill out of our committee.
Then it went to the Rules Committee, and Democratic leadership
intervened. At the last minute, the bill was changed, and the language
ending this discrimination against homeschoolers was removed.
Why would anyone object to ending the wrongful discrimination against
homeschool families? There are over 130,000 homeschoolers in North
Carolina and 1.6 million across the country. They deserve fairness, and
their incredible parents deserve our help.
Sadly, Madam Speaker, that is not going to happen today. Otherwise,
this is a good bill, but it certainly could have been a better bill.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Madam Speaker, when only 39 percent
of Americans have enough savings to cover an emergency costing $1,000
and when 67 percent of Americans say that they will outlive their
retirement savings, the SECURE Act becomes a lifesaver.
It becomes a lifesaver because it makes it easier for small
businesses to offer retirement plans. It gives retirement benefit
opportunities to home healthcare workers, more than half of whom are
women of color, working for extremely low pay.
And I must take note of that, because these individuals are at the
low end of not only quality of life but low end of earnings. They now
have an opportunity for some serious consideration of retirement.
It creates a small employer automatic enrollment credit to make it
easier for workers to participate in 401(k) plans.
These are important changes. It is a great bill, not just a good
bill.
Madam Speaker, I strongly support it, and I urge all my colleagues to
do so.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith), a member of the Ways and Means
Committee, who has been a champion for expanding education savings
accounts for Americans.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak about a
broken agreement and a missed opportunity to help families save for
their children's education.
In April, the Ways and Means Committee marked up this bill in a very
bipartisan manner. We heard ideas from both sides of the aisle to help
Americans save for the future and their retirements.
Like all good negotiations, there was give and take. No side got
everything they wanted, but we reached an agreement where we could pass
the bill unanimously. In short, this is how the American people expect
their government to work.
Madam Speaker, unfortunately, it became clear that this agreement was
not in good faith. At the last minute, Democrats decided to undermine
our bipartisan work on the Ways and Means Committee and stripped out an
issue many Republicans feel strongly about: helping families afford
everyday K-12 education costs.
Expanding 529 education savings accounts to cover common K-12
expenses would help all families save for their children's education
and their unique needs, no matter where they attend school, whether it
is public school, private school, religious school, homeschool, and so
on.
Madam Speaker, I want to know, what is so controversial about helping
families afford educational therapies for students with disabilities?
What is so controversial about making it easier to pay for tutoring,
books, and standardized testing fees?
This is a missed opportunity to help families afford education costs
no matter where they send their children to school, and it is a shame
that partisan politics is getting in the way of helping families
everywhere.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Evans).
Mr. EVANS. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman of this strong,
powerful committee and the ranking member for leading this effort.
Madam Speaker, I rise to offer my support for the SECURE Act.
Making it easier for small businesses to offer retirement savings
plans is vital. It is vital not only for the benefit of these small
firms but also the people they employ, their families, and the
communities they support.
In my home State of Pennsylvania, we have nearly 1 million small
businesses, employing 2.5 million workers, accounting for 46.7 percent
of the workforce for the entire State. Small firms account for 99.6
percent of my State's employers.
Small businesses are a vital part of saving our middle neighborhoods
in Philadelphia and across the country. These are neighborhoods that
are poised to tip either toward blight or growth. By helping small
businesses and their employees, the SECURE Act would help to revitalize
these middle neighborhoods and help our economy grow from the ground
up.
Again, I thank the chairman and his leadership and the ranking member
for this action.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I am very proud to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert), a key member of our committee
who worked on this legislation.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Madam Speaker, to the committee chairman and, in my
world, the chairman for life, you have done great.
It has been an interesting experience being in the minority, but we
are blessed. We have freaky-smart people on the committee. It works.
Even when we disagree, at least the debate and the discussion is fairly
highbrow.
I, too, am concerned on the 529, more so because of the flexibility
and, being the daddy of a 3\1/2\-year-old, not completely knowing if
there are going to be any special needs coming, that choice. We should
love and embrace the concept of that flexibility to take care of our
little people.
I am very encouraged that there is movement towards incentivizing it
and
[[Page H4140]]
making it easier, particularly for smaller businesses, to offer access
into retirement accounts.
We need to have the conversation--and it is uncomfortable for all of
us--go a bit further.
The amount of our society that is now in independent-contractor
relationships, should we be allowed to use technology so that
population also starts to have more and more savings for the future? We
just need to deal with it. That is where much of the economy, in a
demand economy, is going.
My last caveat--and I am voting for the bill. We have come a long
ways. I do worry a little bit about the special agreement on
newspapers, only because if we are truly worried about protecting
workers into their retirement years, do we want to create more even
special, special, special small cutouts where we are allowing the
underfunding of a pension system?
We just need to think that through a little more from an ethical
standpoint. Do we keep creating carve-out after carve-out after carve-
out that creates a fragility for that retired population?
Even though we think we are helping the businesses survive, we
actually hurt the future chances of those retirees getting their
checks. We need to be careful on that.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Sanchez), who was very instrumental in the provisions
that will simplify the Form 5500 filing process for small business.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the SECURE Act. I
thank Chairman Richard Neal for his tireless efforts to get this
legislation across the finish line.
I have been proud to support versions of this bill for many years,
and I am pleased that one of my bills has been included. My piece of
this package offers a simple yet impactful way for small businesses
across the country to better afford retirement plans for their
employees.
Too many Americans simply aren't putting enough money away to ensure
a secure retirement. Today's bill takes important steps to strengthen
access to retirement security for hardworking Americans, and I am proud
to have contributed one piece to solving this puzzle.
{time} 0945
But we still have a lot of work to do. I look forward to the passage
of the SECURE Act today, and I am ready to keep working on the Ways and
Means Committee to continue addressing our national retirement savings
crisis.
Madam Speaker, I again thank Chairman Neal.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Estes), one of our new members of the Ways
and Means Committee.
Mr. ESTES. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the SECURE Act.
It is an overall good policy that will encourage Americans to save for
retirement.
I am pleased that this bill makes it easier for small businesses to
join together and offer retirement plans for more Americans. It allows
graduate students and home healthcare workers to save more for
retirement.
It includes a policy change to help Gold Star families. It also
includes a fix to the taxation of children's unearned income that will
support American Indian Tribal youth and encourage them to pursue a
college education, similar to the legislation that I helped introduce
with my colleague from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
Finally, this bill will allow 529 plans to be used to pay for student
loans and apprenticeship programs.
As a former State treasurer of Kansas, I oversaw a 529 plan and
understand the importance of expanding these plans for our families.
That is why I am disappointed that the manager's amendment removed good
policy from this legislation that would have allowed 529 plans to help
be used for expenses for K-12 education and to help special needs
children.
Earlier this year, my Republican colleagues and I on the Ways and
Means Committee entered good faith negotiations with Chairman Neal and
our Democratic colleagues to craft this bill. As a result, Republicans
and Democrats on the committee unanimously voted for the SECURE Act in
April.
However, since that time, the other side of the aisle played politics
with this legislation when it was before the Rules Committee and
removed those additional 529 provisions that were originally included
to help special needs students. So, while I support today's bill and
the policies that are still included, I sincerely hope that, moving
forward, we can stop playing politics with good pieces of legislation
and work in a bipartisan manner and negotiate in good faith to produce
legislation that will help the American people.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter of support
for the SECURE Act from the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners.
National Association of
Insurance Commissioners,
May 7, 2019.
Hon. Richard E. Neal,
Chairman, Ways and Means Committee, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Kevin Brady,
Ranking Member, Ways and Means Committee, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Neal and Ranking Member Brady: On behalf of
the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC),
we would like to express our support for H.R. 1994, the
Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement
(SECURE) Act. Recognizing the retirement savings crisis that
exists in the United States, state insurance regulators have
worked to make improvements to regulation and guidance
impacting product delivery, compliance, and innovation of
insurance products designed to help mitigate this crisis
under the NAIC Retirement Security Initiative. Given the
unique products and features of our sector, state insurance
regulators have embraced a broader public policy
responsibility to not only ensure consumers remain protected
by a solvent industry, but to help foster an environment
where they have greater flexibility and more options to take
informed steps to secure their retirement. The SECURE Act is
aligned with the goals of this initiative as it seeks to
provide greater consumer options for retirement plans.
Several of the provisions contained in the SECURE Act also
complement our own consumer financial literacy and disclosure
efforts and will make it easier for consumers to save for
retirement. First, the legislation makes it easier for
consumers to engage in a tax-free rollover of an annuity to
another employer-sponsored retirement plan or IRA and avoid
surrender charges and fees, making these products more
portable and providing consumers more flexibility. Second,
the bill would encourage plan participants to think in terms
of lifetime income by requiring benefit statements to break
down the total account balance into estimates of monthly
annuity income at least once a year. Third, the legislation
makes it easier for ERISA plan sponsors to select companies
to offer annuity products by creating a safe harbor that
relies on the conservative solvency regime of the state
insurance regulatory system, which is specifically designed
to ensure that an insurance company's obligations will be met
both today and many years into the future.
We applaud your leadership in this effort to assist savers
in making more-informed decisions to prepare for their
retirement and allowing defined contribution plans to become
a more effective vehicle for providing lifetime income.
Sincerely,
Eric A. Cioppa,
NAIC President, Superintendent, Maine Bureau of Insurance.
David Altmaier,
NAIC Vice President, Commissioner, Florida Office of
Insurance Regulation.
Michael F. Consedine,
Chief Executive Officer, National Association of Insurance
Commissioners.
Raymond G. Farmer,
NAIC President-Elect, Director, South Carolina Department
of Insurance.
Dean L. Cameron,
NAIC Secretary-Treasurer, Director, Idaho Department of
Insurance.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), who was very instrumental in provisions which
will help small businesses sponsor retirement plans, including
multiple-employer plans.
Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise in strong support of the SECURE Act. This legislation is meant
to address one of the great gaps we have in retirement savings:
employees in small businesses, primarily affecting women, minorities,
and young adults.
[[Page H4141]]
I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their
leadership on the issue. I want to thank my good friend Mike Kelly
for partnering with me throughout this process, along with former
colleagues Dave Reichert and Pat Tiberi, with whom I had a chance to
work on this issue in particular.
I also want to thank the Representative in the chair today,
Representative Elaine Luria, our commander. She is the one who
introduced the Gold Star fix. It was a mistake that was made in the Tax
Code that adversely affects survivor benefits for children of our
fallen soldiers.
It also fixes distributions to Native American children and to
students who receive scholarships and grants. I thank her for her
leadership on it.
This is a good, bipartisan, bicameral piece of legislation. I
encourage my colleagues to support it.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Madam Speaker, I do want to say that I plan to
vote for this bill. I support the improvements it makes to savings and
retirement, which have gained bipartisan approval, both in the Senate
and here in the House.
In particular, I appreciate hearing from agricultural cooperatives
across Nebraska's Third District about the importance to them of the
language in this bill reducing PBGC premiums for nonprofits.
I am also incredibly pleased we are moving quickly to address the
Gold Star families tax issue and hope we can complete work on that
problem as quickly--if not more quickly--as the rest of the provisions
in this bill.
I do have reservations and concerns about the process which got us
here and some provisions which are no longer in the bill.
As we know, the bill was marked up in the Ways and Means Committee on
April 2. We reported it out unanimously, a very bipartisan effort. It
was moved out of committee by a voice vote.
Prior to the markup, there were no concerns raised about the
provisions in the bill, provisions that would help families pay for the
education of their children, whether in home school or public school.
As we know, many expenses come up for various reasons.
It is unfortunate that that took place, and I know that this wasn't
the first time. Actually, it was the second time in 2 weeks that we are
here considering legislation that was a product of bipartisan agreement
in committee, but it was altered before it came to the House. It is
very unfortunate.
And as I said at the beginning, I am going to support this bill. It
has many good provisions, but I hope that we can avoid similar
situations from undermining the committee process, undermining the
integrity of the committee system that we have that empowers individual
Members to work together with colleagues on a bipartisan basis. Let's
not undermine that.
Again, I will vote for this bill. It could have been a better bill,
and I hope next time we can address the shortcomings, moving forward.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), chairman of the Trade Subcommittee.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy,
and I appreciate his moving forward on the issue of retirement
security, for which he has been a tireless champion.
We are facing a retirement crisis in this country. Nearly half of
households headed by someone 55 or older lack retirement savings. One
of the many reasons they are not saving enough is lack of access to
retirement plans. This bill moves in that direction.
I appreciate it is going to increase access to employer retirement
plans for people who work in small business and part-time workers.
Of particular interest to me is a provision in this bill that fixes a
quirk in the current law that prevents many home care workers from
participating in a 401(k) or saving with an individual retirement
account, an IRA.
I heard directly from home healthcare workers in Oregon about this
problem. I am pleased, working with the committee, we have been able to
fix this quirk moving forward. I anticipate this is one of many bills
that will be moving forward dealing with retirement security in
America, and I look forward to that progress.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Walberg), who has worked on retirement and pension issues
for many years.
Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from Texas for
yielding, and I thank him for his work.
Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1994, the Setting
Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act.
I would like to thank Chairman Neal and Ranking Member Brady for
their leadership on this important piece of legislation.
For families in my district, putting away enough money for retirement
is a constant struggle. Now more than ever, we need policies that
empower workers to save more and save earlier for retirement.
I am pleased this legislation includes a provision I coauthored with
my colleague from Delaware (Ms. Blunt Rochester). Our bipartisan
provision clarifies rules surrounding annuity plans, making it possible
for more employers to provide guaranteed lifetime income products as
part of their benefits package. Our goal is to remove barriers to
saving and give workers a variety of tools so they can choose what
option best fits their needs.
Madam Speaker, we have a retirement income crisis in this country,
and the SECURE Act will help more Americans retire with dignity and
piece of mind. I urge its passage today.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Washington (Ms. DelBene), who was very instrumental in the provisions
providing pension funding relief for community newspapers and home
healthcare workers as they attempt to maintain their retirement plans.
Ms. DelBENE. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
I rise today in support of the SECURE Act. It is time that we address
the retirement crisis in our country.
The SECURE Act takes several important steps to make it easier for
Americans to save for retirement, and one important example is helping
provide retirement benefit opportunities to home care workers.
Home care workers provide critical services for the elderly and
disabled. Their service is vital to ensure that patients under their
care lead a dignified life, and it is only right that they are able to
have a secure retirement.
The SECURE Act fixes a tax inequity that unintentionally prohibits
many home care workers from participating in a 401(k) or contributing
to an IRA.
If we do not pass the SECURE Act, between 15,000 and 30,000 workers
in my home State of Washington could be kicked out of their defined
contribution plan. With passage of the SECURE Act, home care workers
will rightfully have the same opportunity to save for retirement as
other workers.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Missouri (Mrs. Wagner), a leader who has worked for working moms and
our veterans.
Mrs. WAGNER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from Texas (Mr. Brady)
for yielding me the time.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the SECURE Act.
Over the last two decades, we have made progress in helping Americans
save more for their retirement. U.S. retirement savings have increased
from $11 trillion in 2001 to $28 trillion today. But we need to do
more, especially in this booming economy.
This legislation will increase the number of workers with access to
retirement plans, encourage higher savings rates, and enable older
working adults to save for a secure retirement.
The SECURE Act is a commonsense, private-sector solution enabling
Americans to save more for their retirement by expanding access for
workers who choose to participate in a workplace plan. It
simultaneously preserves employer choice and competition.
The SECURE Act has the added benefit of lowering taxes for our Gold
Star families. Providing more for the relatives and the children of
U.S. military members who gave their lives to secure our freedom and
liberty is most fitting on the eve of our Memorial Day weekend.
[[Page H4142]]
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation today.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), who was a leader on the kiddie tax issue
addressing Tribal distributions.
Ms. MOORE. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership and
for moving this bipartisan legislation forward. This is really a
necessary step to ensuring that more Americans can save for retirement.
I also commend the chairman for his swift action to redress the harsh
tax rate and unintended consequences caused by the Tax Cuts and Jobs
Act of 2017 on Gold Star families, low-income children, and young
adults who receive payments from Tribal governments.
Our special tax rules on unearned income of children and young adults
to prevent wealthy families from engaging in tax planning to
artificially lower their tax burden, of course, is not relevant to
these payments made to Gold Star families, survivor benefits, and
Tribal children.
The 2017 rate repeal only partially addressed an underlying problem
where additional legislation is required relative to Tribal youth. Mr.
Estes and I introduced bipartisan legislation, H.R. 2018, to fix the
underlying problem of the kiddie tax on taxable disbursements made by
Tribal governments.
So, Madam Speaker, I ask the chairman to tell Members of this Chamber
and the Tribes who are watching closely throughout the country what his
intentions are relative to the underlying problem with the kiddie tax.
Mr. NEAL. Will the gentlewoman yield?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Chair, I yield myself 30 seconds.
I want to thank the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) for her
support of the bill before us and her leadership on addressing the
unfair tax that has plagued Tribes making taxable distributions to
their children and young adults.
{time} 1000
The kiddie tax was enacted to prevent wealthy families from shifting
family income to minor children.
The rationale for this new law does not apply to funds distributed by
Indian Tribal governments because Indian Tribes are not taxable
entities and their distributions could never be intended for the
purpose of a tax deduction.
The Ways and Means Committee will work to address this problem, with
the goal of excluding such Tribal government distributions from the
kiddie tax provisions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 15 seconds to the gentlewoman from
Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
Ms. MOORE. Madam Speaker, this is a first step toward meeting our
trust obligations to the sovereign first peoples of this country.
I thank the chairman for yielding.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Madam Speaker, I want to recognize those who worked in a bipartisan
way to address the Gold Star issue: Representatives Bacon, Diaz-Balart,
Herrera Beutler, Holding, Marchant, Wagner, Waltz, and Wenstrup.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, how much time is remaining on both sides?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 14\3/4\
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Texas has 6\3/4\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Schneider), who is very knowledgeable about retirement
issues.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the SECURE
Act.
A secure and dignified retirement is a critical part of the American
Dream, but for too many seniors, this aspiration is falling
increasingly out of reach.
I am pleased that this House is taking action today in response. Our
bill will help more Americans save for retirement by allowing workers
to participate in 401(k) plans.
Additionally, the legislation makes it easier for small businesses to
offer retirement plans to their employees and help small businesses set
up automatic enrollment programs. It replaces antiquated barriers
slowing the adoption of multiemployer plans and improves the quality of
service providers.
The AARP estimates that these changes will lead to more than 700,000
new retirement accounts.
Finally, as we approach Memorial Day and reflect on the ultimate
sacrifice made by fallen servicemembers and their families, I am
pleased this legislation fixes a provision in the 2017 Republican tax
law that increased taxes on survivor benefits paid by families. Our
Gold Star families already deal with the unimaginable loss of a loved
one; they should not also be facing a tax increase.
Madam Speaker, I am so proud this legislation was a bipartisan effort
in the Ways and Means Committee, and I urge my colleagues to support
this important bill to improve retirement security.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Suozzi).
Mr. SUOZZI. Madam Speaker, there is a retirement crisis in America
today. Working men and women simply just don't have enough money in
retirement savings.
I rise today to advocate for the bipartisan SECURE Act, which will:
one, help small businesses provide retirement plans that include
automatic enrollment by giving those businesses an opportunity to pool
together and by offering them a tax credit to help pay for startup
costs; and, two, provide 401(k)s for the rising number of part-time
workers and independent contractors in the new tech economy that can be
portable from their current jobs to the next ones.
Since the 1980s, the American economy has grown dramatically. Since
1983, the Dow Jones has gone up 1,200 percent and the GDP has gone up
600 percent, yet the wages of the American people have gone up less
than 20 percent. No longer is hard work a guarantee of achieving the
American Dream.
Every American, whether liberal or conservative, believes that if you
are willing to work 40 or 50 hours a week and 50 weeks a year that you
should be able to have a decent place to live, to educate your
children, to have health insurance, and to retire one day without being
scared. That is simply not happening.
The SECURE Act will help make retirement security a reality for
millions of Americans.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Waltz), a veteran, a Green Beret, and a new Member of
Congress.
Mr. WALTZ. Madam Speaker, as a combat veteran and as a Green Beret,
this is personal for me. I know firsthand the seriousness of the call
to serve our country, and I know that when soldiers take their place on
the battlefield, they are prepared to defend America and lose their
lives for our freedom.
The families of our servicemembers wait for their loved one's safe
return nervously and anxiously await hearing their voice and feeling
the comfort of their warm embrace once more. Unfortunately, for some,
the knock on their door instead initiates them into a fraternity no
family wants to join. That knock changes them forever and makes them
part of the Gold Star family.
When our servicemembers pass, many of their spouses put their
benefits in their children's name. As if the loss of a mother or a
father isn't and wasn't painful enough, some of our Gold Star
children's pain is worsened by an unintended oversight in our Tax Code
which forces them to pay thousands in additional taxes on survivor
benefits and raises their tax liability from 12 percent to nearly 40
percent.
This is not just a financial issue; it is a strategic issue for our
Volunteer military. It affects recruitment and retention. Some people
may not want to volunteer with the possibility of a large financial
burden on their loved one if the worst happens.
The bottom line is, if our family support starts cracking, the entire
foundation of our modern military is in trouble. We have an opportunity
today to right this wrong and to fix this with the Gold Star Family Tax
Relief Act, which is being included in the SECURE Act that is up for
today's vote.
[[Page H4143]]
I would thank Chairman Neal and Ranking Member Brady for quickly
recognizing this issue and for including this measure in the final
bill.
Today, I call upon my colleagues in the House to make this right. I
hope that Members will join me in supporting the passage of this
legislation to show our country's appreciation to the Gold Star
families for laying so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Beyer) and thank the gentleman for his valuable work on
the kiddie tax issue that affects the children of fallen first
responders.
Mr. BEYER. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1994.
I would like to begin by thanking Chairman Neal, my friend Ron Kind,
and all of the good folks and committee staff for their hard work on
this bill.
The 2017 Republican tax law was passed despite being littered with
errors, unintended consequences, and just straight-up bad ideas.
One of the most unjustifiable and immediately painful provisions of
the bill was the unintended consequence of this change to the kiddie
tax, which resulted in massive tax increases for the surviving children
of servicemembers, first responders, as well as for scholarship
recipients and other minors. The SECURE Act repeals that provision.
These populations deserve our sympathy and support. I can only hope
that this was a stunning oversight.
Since the harms of this provision came to light during tax filings,
many Members, including myself, heard from constituents whose families
were subject to these unjust and shocking bills.
Several bills have been introduced to address these tax issues for
various impacted groups, including my bill, H.R. 2840, which exempted
the survivors of first responders. It is a strong, positive bill, and I
encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I am very proud to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the leader for Republicans of
the U.S. House of Representatives.
Mr. McCARTHY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Before I begin, I want to thank both sides. I want to thank the
chairman and I want to thank the ranking member, not for the bill that
is on the floor today but for the bill that was put out of committee.
When we look across the country, we see division. Very seldom can we
ever find a bill that gets every Democrat's and every Republican's
support, but that is what we look for, that committees can work
together.
The whole reason bills go through committees before they come to the
floor is this is where the expertise is, this is where the debates
happen, this is where it is combined together.
But now I want to apologize to the chairman. I don't know what the
gentleman's leadership did or why. But why would they change the moment
that we have for the country to see something that they haven't seen in
a while? Why would they do something that a chairman and a ranking
member and every member on that committee, regardless of where they
come from across this country, regardless of party, agreed to?
Special interest has power. Special interest is more powerful than
the members who are in that committee with the expertise. Special
interest is more powerful than Members of Congress finding common
ground. Special interest is more powerful with the leadership on the
other side.
They should not treat their Members this way. They should not treat
America this way.
So let's talk about this bill. Because what it really goes to is, how
powerful is this special interest, and who are they hurting?
Many parents choose to use a 529 savings account to help them save
money for their children's education. We all agree on each side of the
aisle that the most important thing that happens when you have a child
is the opportunity that they will have. It is no longer about what you
will become; it is what your children's opportunities will be.
We all agree that education is the great equalizer. It doesn't matter
where a person grows up or what side of the street they live on, but
education will give everybody that opportunity.
As a Republican leader, when I watched this committee work, I was
proud. I was proud of both sides. I was proud that they were able to
come together. And where they came together was on 529 accounts. These
plans allow them to invest in a tax-free account, incur interest, and
spend it on educational expenses like tuition.
For many years, these accounts only applied to college-related
expenses, but, today, thanks to the Republican-led tax reform law in
2017, families can now use those funds to pay K-12 costs too.
Because why would we want to hurt somebody? Maybe they were in a bad
school district or have other reasons. We want everybody in America to
have that opportunity. That was a big win for all families--Republican,
Democrat, Green Party, didn't matter.
Under current law, 529 savings accounts cannot be used for K-12 book
costs, tutoring expenses for when kids fall behind and we want them to
be able to catch up, fees for college admission exams--anybody that has
a child at that age knows how much is spent on all of the exams--or to
pay for educational therapy for students with disabilities.
Wouldn't everybody want to help that child with disabilities? I
believe so. The action of the committee proved that. Every Democrat in
the committee said that, and every member on the Republican side said
that. I was proud of that.
But, unfortunately, special interest has more power. This is why, to
me, I have real concerns on this bill. The official bill report is
fantastic, what came out of committee. But when it got to the Democrat
leadership, I guess they had different plans.
Now, I shouldn't be shocked, because I was sitting in this well last
week with the same dilemma. Another committee, Energy and Commerce, was
dealing with a really important issue, much like what we are dealing
with today, prescription drugs. And what happened was that both sides
agreed on how to make prescription drug prices lower and give Americans
more options, and they all voted for it. But it went right through that
leadership, Madam Speaker, on the other side, and special interest won
again. They put a poison pill in, so that will never become law.
Madam Speaker, because special interest pressured this leadership to
change this bill, it says something. To me, it says three things very
clearly.
It seems to me that the Democratic leadership is not the same
Democratic leadership that I knew in the past. There are people on the
other side of the aisle who call themselves Socialist Democrats. It
seems to me that they want institutions, not individuals, to be focused
on education funding. They want partisan interests, not parents, to
decide how children learn. And they want the Federal Government, not
families, to have control over their money.
{time} 1015
But that is not what the American people want. The American people
want exactly what happened in that committee, exactly the power that
brought all the Republicans and all the Democrats together. They don't
want special interests to continue to run this House.
The committee proved they could stand up. Whom did they stand up for?
Those who need it the most: the parents of children with disabilities,
leveling the playing field so every child has an opportunity when it
comes to education.
Of all the issues that could divide us, Madam Speaker, I don't
understand why the leadership did that to the Ways and Means Committee.
I don't think that is right for the work that the chairman and the
ranking member put in. We deserve better. We displayed that we could be
better. Unfortunately, special interests won over the parents, and that
is wrong.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding and for
his leadership on bringing this important legislation to the floor.
Let's say what this bill really does. It provides Americans who work
hard access to retirement with dignity and respect. It allows workers
who don't have
[[Page H4144]]
access to retirement accounts--including home healthcare workers, part-
time workers, as well as multiple employers--to have access to
retirement accounts.
The SECURE Act fixes this. This is an important step forward in
providing much-needed retirement security for so many Americans. It
encourages small employers to develop 401(k) plans. It helps build our
workforce by allowing apprentices access to college savings accounts to
cover the cost of purchasing equipment necessary for their training for
their chosen trade. This is a big step forward for those workers.
Finally, Madam Speaker, I appreciate the fact that this bill also
addresses some of the many oversights of the 2017 Republican tax bill,
including addressing how children are taxed, especially Tribal
children.
This is a good bill, and I support it.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Mrs. Murphy), who was instrumental on a provision allowing
long-term, part-time workers to participate in 401(k) plans.
Mrs. MURPHY. Madam Speaker, if you spend your life working hard, then
you should have the dignity of a secure retirement. That is why I rise
today in strong support for the SECURE Act, a bipartisan bill that will
help more Americans retire with dignity and with a higher quality of
life. It allows older Americans to continue to invest more and for
longer in their traditional IRAs so that they can get a greater ROI on
their hard-earned money.
It also contains a provision I authored requiring employers to allow
long-term, part-time employees to participate in a company's 401(k)
plan. This change will especially help women, as women are more likely
than men to be long-term, part-time workers.
Finally, the SECURE Act fixes a mistake the Republicans made last
Congress when they rammed through their partisan tax giveaway to
corporations and the wealthy. In doing so, they inadvertently raised
taxes on Gold Star children and families.
As we fix this problem today, I hope this body remembers that process
matters and that a bad process leads to unintended consequences that
hurt everyday Americans. I am glad that we can undo some of that damage
today.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the SECURE Act, which
is a good piece of bipartisan legislation that helps countless American
families.
Mr. BRADY. I reserve the balance of my time, Madam Speaker.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Larson), who was very instrumental on a provision
related to benefits to volunteer firefighters and emergency medical
responders.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I rise today to support the
SECURE Act and commend Chairman Neal and Republican Leader Brady for
the outstanding work on this, as well as our colleagues Ron Kind and
Mike Kelly. I also would like to single out Dave Reichert, who is no
longer here, and myself for the work that was done with regard to
volunteers.
The provisions of this bill in terms of aid and assistance to rank-
and-file citizens are legendary--and I thank Mr. Neal again for those
efforts--but specifically for volunteer firefighters, for EMTs, and for
those who give selflessly in an opportunity to serve their communities.
For the meager amounts of uniforms and whatever they received in
compensation, to have that taxed was an insult. So I am proud, again,
to make sure that this piece of legislation included an opportunity for
volunteers all across this country. Twenty-three communities in my
State have volunteers.
I thank the chairman again for his leadership.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Scott). Chairman Bobby Scott is responsible for a number
of very important provisions in this legislation.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
I rise in support of the SECURE Act, a bipartisan proposal to address
our Nation's retirement security crisis. Several of the bill's
provisions are under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Education and
Labor, and I would like to discuss two of them.
First, the SECURE Act makes it easier for small businesses to band
together to form multiple employer plans. This is expected to increase
workers' access to retirement savings programs with potentially lower
cost investment options.
Second, the SECURE Act includes a carefully and narrowly tailored
safe harbor for the selection of an annuity provider for 401(k) plans.
This limited safe harbor is intended to ease employers' concerns about
their fiduciary liability and to expand workers' access to annuities
and other lifetime income options.
I thank Chairman Neal and Ranking Member Brady for their leadership,
and I urge my colleagues to support the SECURE Act.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Malinowski).
Mr. MALINOWSKI. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my strong
support for the bipartisan SECURE Act. This bill will enable hundreds
of thousands of working and middle-class Americans to retire with the
dignity they deserve.
According to the AARP, 72 percent of New Jersey's workers say they
are anxious about having enough money to live comfortably through
retirement, and 86 percent of workers without access to a retirement
savings account would take advantage of one if available.
Madam Speaker, 1.7 million people in New Jersey work for employers
that do not provide access to a retirement plan. So this year, our
State passed a law requiring businesses with 25 or more employees to
participate in a retirement savings program. The SECURE Act will make
it much easier for small- and medium-sized businesses in New Jersey to
meet this requirement by allowing them to pool together to create
multi-employer plans. It also expands access to retirement accounts for
home healthcare workers, a rapidly growing sector of our economy.
Passing this bill today will go a long way toward helping Americans
retire with peace of mind. I am grateful for the bipartisan support,
and I urge my colleagues to back the bill.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Virginia (Mrs. Luria) and thank her particularly for her critical
leadership in preventing an unfair and unexpected tax burden from being
imposed on the children of our fallen soldiers.
Mrs. LURIA. Madam Speaker, we are all in Congress because we see room
for improvement in America, especially for our servicemembers,
veterans, and our military families. As a 20-year Navy veteran myself,
I know it is not just the brave men and women who fight for America,
but also the families who support them every step of the way.
When Gold Star widows from Virginia Beach contacted me about how
their tax bills jumped thousands of dollars as a result of the 2000 tax
law, I knew I had to do something. That is why I took action to
introduce the bipartisan Gold Star Family Tax Relief Act, which fixes
the unintended tax hike that many Gold Star families experienced.
A number of families across our coastal Virginia district have shared
their stories about how this tax law changed their lives. One woman,
the widow of a Navy SEAL killed in Afghanistan, saw the taxes on her
son's benefits rise by $4,000 in 2018, another by $6,000, and another
by $2,500.
What this tax bill did to Gold Star families was wrong, but I have
been heartened to see so many of my colleagues join me in a bipartisan
effort to right these wrongs. As of today, we have 155 cosponsors and
received endorsements of 20 veterans service organizations.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. DeGette). The time of the gentlewoman
has expired.
[[Page H4145]]
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from Virginia an
additional 1 minute.
Mrs. LURIA. Madam Speaker, with this momentum, we can fix a problem
for so many heroic families and ensure security for their benefits.
I include in the Record a letter signed by 20 veterans service
organizations in support of the Gold Star family tax provisions
included within the SECURE Act.
May 22, 2019.
Hon. Elaine Luria,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Congresswoman Luria: As leaders of the major veterans,
military, and survivor organizations, we are pleased to offer
our support for H.R. 2481, the Gold Star Family Tax Relief
Act.
Surviving spouses of service members who die in the line of
duty and military retirees who die from service-connected
wounds, illnesses, or injuries are entitled to Dependency and
Indemnity Compensation (DIC) benefits from the Department of
Veterans Affairs. Survivors who paid into the Department of
Defense Survivor Benefits Plan (SBP) have a dollar-for-dollar
offset of their SBP benefits by the amount of DIC benefits.
To avoid the SBP/DIC offset, surviving spouses often sign
over SBP benefits to their children to ensure the family
receives both earned benefits.
Due to a recent change in tax law, known as the ``Kiddie
Tax,'' Gold Star families who were formerly obligated to pay
12 to 15 percent in taxes on their earned benefits are now
being taxed up to 37 percent, leaving them thousands of
dollars in tax debt. This important bill would rightfully
repeal the Kiddie Tax and reinstate military survivor
benefits to the previous tax rate.
Thank you again for your leadership on this issue. We look
forward to working with you and your staff to pass this
important legislation immediately.
Sincerely,
Robert Wallace, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United
States; Bonnie Carroll, Tragedy Assistance Program for
Survivors; Harriet Boyden, Gold Star Wives of America; Joseph
R. Chenelly, AMVETS; Louis Celli, The American Legion; Joyce
Wessel Raezer, National Military Famiy Association; Dana T.
Atkins, Military Officers Association of America; Carl Blake,
Paralyzed Veterans of America; Keith A. Reed, Air Force
Sergeants Association; John Cho, AMSUS, the Society of
Federal Health Professionals.
James T. Currie, Commissioned Officers Assn. of the US
Public Health Service, Inc; Norman Rosenshein, Jewish War
Veterans of the USA; Vincent Patton III, Non Commissioned
Officers Assn. of the United States of America; Randy Reid,
USCG Chief Petty Officers Assn.; Jeff J. Schloesser, Army
Aviation Association of America; Christopher Cole,
Association of the United States Navy; Carol Setteducato,
Chief Warrant Officers Association of the US Coast Guard;
Thomas ``LPM'' Howlett, Marine Corps Reserve Association;
Kenneth Greenberg, The Retired Enlisted Association; Brian
Dempsey, Wounded Warrior Project.
Mrs. LURIA. Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote for
the SECURE Act and, in doing that, fix this tax problem that has
impacted so many of our Gold Star families across the Commonwealth of
Virginia and the country.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Madam Speaker, how sad it is that some are trying to make this a
partisan, petty measure.
The truth is, in 2014, in an original draft of tax reform, this
provision was included by the Joint Committee on Taxation to simplify
the Tax Code and to stop tax loopholes. That draft was praised by my
Democratic colleagues, by Mr. Neal, Mr. Kind, and Mr. Thompson.
In over 5 years, no one spotted this unintended consequence. When it
surfaced, Republicans and Democrats came together immediately and
resolved to not just fix it but to make it retroactive.
Why make this a petty, partisan issue? Our Gold Star parents deserve
better.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I am
prepared to close. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I am proud that, last session, Republicans and
Democrats came together to pass a retirement security bill not once but
twice because we knew how important this was. I was chairman, and I was
proud to help lead that effort.
This year, I am the proudest leader of the Republicans on the Ways
and Means Committee to work with Chairman Neal again to make it even
better to try to help families save.
But I am disappointed in the process after it left the committee,
through no fault of Chairman Neal's.
Just 2 months ago, we heard Democratic lawmakers sit in that seat and
say they will work to restore the people's faith that government works
in the public's interest. They said they will pass laws and make sure
our government acts in the best interests of the American people, not
entrenched special interests.
It is unfortunate that every word there was stomped on this week by
special interest groups that forced our Democratic friends to make
changes to a bill that would help children and parents with costs
associated with schools.
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act allowed parents to save tax-free for
schools from kindergarten through 12th grade, and these bipartisan
reforms that were stripped from this bill would have allowed parents to
use their education savings dollars for homeschooling and additional
kindergarten through 12 expenses at public, private, and religious
schools.
This is money the families could have used for books, online
education material, tutoring, AP classes, university exams, and
educational therapies for students, including for kids with
disabilities.
Every parent blessed with a special needs child or one who struggles
to keep up in school knows the constant search to find the right
learning tools, the effective therapies, and the trained tutors to help
their challenged children learn.
Apparently, for our teachers' union, that was wrong. They moved
effectively to block the ability of parents to help their kids, whether
they are gifted, whether they have learning disabilities, whether they
need that tutor, or whether a child is severely challenged, mentally
and physically, and needs that help.
What do we have to fear from parents who want to help their kids and
use their own dollars for it?
What would our Nation be if denied the genius of Steven Spielberg who
overcame dyslexia as a child or CNN anchor Anderson Cooper whose
parents hired a special instructor to help him overcome his learning
disabilities?
Where we would be without business leaders like Steve Jobs, Charles
Schwab, Richard Branson, or Henry Ford, all with learning disabilities,
all who have made amazing contributions to our country?
Blocking these provisions is not proeducation, and there is no way it
is prochild.
{time} 1030
It is beyond me how an education association can oppose parents using
their own savings to help their child reach their highest potential.
But I don't fault them. I fault the lawmakers who are beholden to them,
who removed these provisions.
This bill deserves support, and I will strongly support it, but I am
terribly disappointed.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
As I close, I want to take a moment to celebrate this truly
bipartisan process that brought this legislation to the floor today.
First, I want to thank the Democratic members and Republican members
of the Committee on Ways and Means, and, in particular, I want to thank
Mr. Brady for his good work along the way.
I also want to acknowledge that there is more work to be done in the
leadership space in terms of retirement savings, and I am hopeful that
we will be able to do that as well.
Let me acknowledge Mr. Roe, Mrs. Trahan, Mrs. McMorris Rodgers, Ms.
Blunt Rochester, Mr. Walberg, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Banks, Mr. Pocan, Mr.
Budd, Mrs. Luria, and Mr. Bacon.
Certainly, as I come down the home stretch in closing, I want to
acknowledge much of the good work that has taken place by staff members
on both sides as well. But let me cite on the Democratic side, if I
could--this was a pretty big bill, and it required a team effort. The
Democratic staff, including Kara Getz, Andrew Grossman, Beth Bell,
Aruna Kalyanam, Mary Petrovic, and Lee Slater all did yeomen and
[[Page H4146]]
yeowomen's work in making sure that we would get to this day.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in support of the
``Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019.''
H.R. 1994, the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement
(SECURE) Act helps Americans to save more for a secure retirement and
delivering a urgently needed fix for Gold Star military families facing
drastic tax hikes under the GOP tax scam.
This legislation:
Makes it easier for small businesses to offer retirement plans to
their employees;
Ensures that hard-working home health care workers can receive
retirement benefits; and,
Eliminates the unexpected and unfair enormous tax increases caused by
the GOP tax scam that were on the survivorship benefits of children in
Gold Star military families already facing the extraordinary hardship
of losing a loved one.
The spouses of our fallen heroes sometimes sign over earned benefits
to their children to ensure the family receives all benefits.
This bill will help Gold Star Families who are being taxed unfairly
by the Trump Tax Cut.
But because the new Republican tax law brought changes to how
children's assets are taxed, many Gold Star Families are required to
pay thousands of additional dollars in taxes on survivor benefits--a
crushing blow to families who have already given so much to our
country.
Prior to the Trump Tax Cut Scam, money given by the military to the
children of troops who died on duty were taxed at the same rate as
their surviving parents.
But under Trump's tax cuts the changes included in the December 2017
tax law overhaul, those benefits were instead treated the same as
family estate transfers, which increased the tax rate from no more than
15 percent to up to 37 percent.
This change significantly raised the tax bills for many of those
military families.
It is important to provide these needed changes to protect Gold Star
Families, and I look forward to the additional changes that are under
way to help others hurt by the inequity of the Trump tax hike for the
very rich.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 389, the previous question is ordered on
the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further
consideration of H.R. 1994 is postponed.
____________________