Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Congress shows signs of bipartisanship with retirement benefits bill

Opinion

401k statement
DNY59/Getty Images

Lopez is president of the Hispanic Leadership Fund, a nonpartisan public policy advocacy organization that advances liberty, opportunity and prosperity for all.

With financial insecurity looming in the consciousness of millions of Americans, it was encouraging to see the U.S. House of Representatives recently passed legislation that strengthens and expands opportunities for those who participate in private retirement plans through their employer. Tens of millions of Americans stand to benefit from potential changes in the law.

The Securing a Strong Retirement Act, often referred to as SECURE 2.0, passed the chamber with overwhelming bipartisan support (by a vote of 414-5) — which is in and of itself eyebrow-raising these days.


The bill includes a series of critical changes that will help small businesses and their employees, lower- and middle-income families, and anyone attempting to save and improve their economic outlook.

One of the most important provisions of SECURE 2.0 is enhancement of the Saver’s Credit, a tax credit available to low- and moderate-income workers who make contributions out of their salary to their employer-sponsored 401(k), 403(b), SIMPLE, SEP or governmental 457 plan, or who contribute to traditional or Roth IRAs.

Under current law, the credit percentage — which is multiplied by the contribution (up to the maximum contribution of $2,000) — is 50 percent, 20 percent, 10 percent or zero, based on the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income. SECURE 2.0 eliminates the MAGI tiers and makes the credit percentage 50 percent for all who don’t surpass the upper-income threshold. For example, if a married couple has $48,000 of income, and one of them makes a $2,000 contribution to a plan or IRA, the current credit of 10 percent equals a $200 tax credit. Under SECURE 2.0, that same couple would receive a 50 percent credit — $1,000.

SECURE 2.0 also incentivizes small businesses to offer retirement plans, an employee benefit that is often difficult for small businesses to establish.The three-year small-business start-up credit is currently 50 percent of administrative costs, up to an annual cap that can be as much as $5,000. If a company with up to 100 employees starts a retirement plan and spends $3,000 per year administering it, the employer currently receives a $1,500 per year credit for three years. Under SECURE 2.0, that 50 percent credit would increase to 100 percent for employers with up to 50 employees, going from $1,500 to $3,000 in this example.

To illustrate the power of the additional credit based on contributions, assume that a 40-employee company makes $500 contributions for each of its employees. The contribution-based credit for that company over five years would total $70,000 — $20,000 in each of the first two years, $15,000 in the third year, $10,000 in the fourth and $5,000 in the fifth. This is a powerful incentive that helps both the small business itself and of course its employees.

SECURE 2.0 allows student loan payments to be treated as elective deferrals for purposes of matching contributions. Under the bill, an employer would be permitted to make matching student loan contributions under 401(k) and 403(b) plans. This addresses a problem facing millions of employees who are so buried in student debt that they cannot afford to make retirement contributions and thus lose out on matching contributions offered by their employer. For example, if an employer provides a 50 percent match and an employee makes student loan payments of $1,000, the employer would make a $500 contribution to the plan on behalf of that employee.

There are a whole host of other provisions. For example, the bill would help part-time employees become eligible to participate in their employer’s retirement plan, addressing a key concern under today’s rules. Also, the bill would help our nation’s military spouses become covered by retirement plans despite having to move so much to support their spouses. And the bill establishes a lost-and-found registry to help individuals find retirement benefits that they have earned but lost track of.

With bipartisan cooperation toward solving problems seeming impossible to find, the SECURE 2.0 bill represents important progress that benefits working families across the country. The Senate has its own version making its way through the legislative process. Those following these bills closely expect that these bills will be combined and probably included in a broader legislative package.

Regardless of how it comes to be, let’s hope that lawmakers continue to work together on such a critical issue as financial empowerment for everyday Americans.

Read More

Two volunteers standing in front of a table with toiletries and supplies.

Mutual aid volunteers hand out food, toiletries and other supplies outside the fence of Amphi Park in Tucson, which was closed recently over concerns about the unsheltered population that previously lived there.

Photo by Pascal Sabino/Bolts

Facing a Crackdown on Homelessness, Two Arizona Cities Offer Different Responses

In August, fewer than 250 voters cast a ballot in a South Tucson recall election targeting the mayor and two allies in the city council. The three officials, Mayor Roxnna “Roxy” Valenzuela and council members Brian Flagg and Cesar Aguirre, form a progressive coalition in the small city’s leadership. Outside government, they also all work with Casa Maria, a local soup kitchen that provides hundreds of warm meals daily and distributes clothing, toiletries and bedding to the city’s unhoused population.

It was their deeds providing for the homeless population that put a target on their back. A political rival claimed their humanitarian efforts and housing initiatives acted as a magnet for problems that the already struggling city was ill-equipped to handle.

Keep ReadingShow less
From Nixon to Trump: A Blueprint for Restoring Congressional Authority
the capitol building in washington d c is seen from across the water

From Nixon to Trump: A Blueprint for Restoring Congressional Authority

The unprecedented power grab by President Trump, in many cases, usurping the clear and Constitutional authority of the U.S. Congress, appears to leave our legislative branch helpless against executive branch encroachment. In fact, the opposite is true. Congress has ample authority to reassert its role in our democracy, and there is a precedent.

During the particularly notable episode of executive branch corruption during the Nixon years, Congress responded with a robust series of reforms. Campaign finance laws were dramatically overhauled and strengthened. Nixon’s overreach on congressionally authorized spending was corrected with the passage of the Impoundment Act. And egregious excesses by the military and intelligence community were blunted by the War Powers Act and the bipartisan investigation by Senator Frank Church (D-Idaho).

Keep ReadingShow less
In and Out: The Limits of Term Limits

Person speaking in front of an American flag

Jason_V/Getty Images

In and Out: The Limits of Term Limits

Nearly 14 years ago, after nearly 12 years of public service, my boss, Rep. Todd Platts, surprised many by announcing he was not running for reelection. He never term-limited himself, per se. Yet he had long supported legislation for 12-year term limits. Stepping aside at that point made sense—a Cincinnatus move, with Todd going back to the Pennsylvania Bar as a hometown judge.

Term limits are always a timely issue. Term limits may have died down as an issue in the halls of Congress, but I still hear it from people in my home area.

Keep ReadingShow less
“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”:
A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

Liliana Mason

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”: A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

In the aftermath of the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the threat of political violence has become a topic of urgent concern in the United States. While public support for political violence remains low—according to Sean Westwood of the Polarization Research Lab, fewer than 2 percent of Americans believe that political murder is acceptable—even isolated incidence of political violence can have a corrosive effect.

According to political scientist Lilliana Mason, political violence amounts to a rejection of democracy. “If a person has used violence to achieve a political goal, then they’ve given up on the democratic process,” says Mason, “Instead, they’re trying to use force to affect government.”

Keep ReadingShow less