Pension & Benefits News Bipartisan retirement savings 2.0 talks ongoing
Tuesday, March 17, 2020

Bipartisan retirement savings 2.0 talks ongoing

By Pension and Benefits Editorial Staff

Bipartisan talks among lawmakers on another round of retirement savings legislation known as “Retirement 2.0” or “SECURE Act 2.0” are ongoing. The bipartisan Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act (SECURE Act) (P.L. 116-94) signed into law at the end of 2019 was the first major retirement legislation enacted since 2006.

Retirement 2.0. “Talks are ongoing,” a spokesperson for House Ways and Means Committee ranking member Kevin Brady (R-TX) told Wolters Kluwer on February 25, 2020. “Brady is always dedicated and looking for ways to build on this work [SECURE Act] to make it easier for Americans to plan and save for retirement.”

Additionally, a spokesperson for House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal (D-MA) discussed the matter with Wolters Kluwer on February 25, but details remain scarce as to when the legislative text will be unveiled. “Talks are underway, but I don’t have any details on timing for legislation at this point,” the spokesperson for Neal said.

However, Neal is expected to move the retirement 2.0 legislation this year. “Strengthening Americans’ retirement security continues to be a priority for the Chairman,” the House Ways and Means Committee majority said in a February 24 tweet.

Automatic-enrollment mandate. Neal’s Automatic Retirement Plan Bill and the Retirement Plan Simplification and Enhancement Bill, both introduced in 2017, are likely to be a part of the package. Likewise, Sens. Rob Portman’s (R-OH) and Ben Cardin’s (D-MD) Retirement Security and Savings Bill, introduced last year, is also expected to have a seat at the table. The bipartisan Senate bill largely focuses on enhancing coverage with small employers and part-time workers.

Notably, the Secure Act 2.0 package is expected to include a provision favored by Neal requiring certain employers to maintain automatic-enrollment retirement plans or otherwise face an excise tax for failure to comply. This requirement, which would be a new federal mandate, is likely to receive criticism from Republican lawmakers.

Source: Legislative update.

Back to Top

Interested in submitting an article?

Submit your information to us today!

Learn More