WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SF 4797

Minnesota Secure Choice retirement program provisions modification

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Nick Frentz and 3 co-sponsors

Minnesota SF 4797 proposes changes to who is covered and how the Secure Choice retirement program operates, affecting enrollment, contributions, and administrative rules.

Referred to State and Local Government
#retirement #labor #employment #andlaborandindustrydepartment
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 4797

Summary: Minnesota SF 4797 — Minnesota Secure Choice Retirement Program Provisions Modification

Overview

  • Jurisdiction: Minnesota
  • Session: 2025-2026
  • Bill Title: Minnesota Secure Choice retirement program provisions modification
  • Purpose (as indicated by title): Modify provisions related to the Minnesota Secure Choice retirement program.

Key Details

  • Status: Introduced and referred to committee
    • Date of Introduction/First Reading: March 25, 2026
    • Committee: State and Local Government
  • Sponsors:
    • Primary and co-sponsors include:
    • Sandy Pappas
    • Judy Seeberger
    • Nick Frentz
    • Jeff Howe
    • These sponsors indicate bipartisan or cross-chamber interest in adjusting the Secure Choice framework.

What the bill seeks to modify (likely areas based on the title)

Note: The summary below reflects typical areas addressed by “modification” bills to Secure Choice programs. The exact text would specify statutory amendments; the following outlines common substantive and procedural elements typically affected.

1) Program Scope and Eligibility

  • Adjustments to who participates in the Minnesota Secure Choice retirement program (e.g., expanding or narrowing employer coverage, or specifying or updating employee eligibility thresholds).
  • Potential changes to exemptions for certain employers or employee groups.

2) Plan Design and Investment Provisions

  • Possible alterations to default investment options, employee contribution mechanics, or employer-minimum contribution requirements (if any).
  • Revisions to administrative rules governing plan investment fees, transparency, and reporting.

3) Administrative and Oversight Provisions

  • Changes to how the program is administered by the state or designated fiduciaries.
  • Updates to oversight, reporting requirements, or performance metrics to ensure efficiency and fairness.
  • Adjustments to the roles of state agencies, boards, or commissions in implementing or enforcing the program.

4) Funding, Costs, and Economic Impact

  • Provisions addressing the cost to employers, employees, or state government.
  • Clarifications on funding sources for program administration, outreach, and compliance monitoring.
  • Potential impact on small businesses versus large employers.

5) Compliance, Enforcement, and Penalties

  • Modifications to penalties for non-compliance or late enrollment.
  • Streamlined processes for enrollment, opt-out provisions, or termination of participation.
  • Confidentiality and data protection requirements for participant information.

Who Would Be Affected

  • Employees: Workers covered by Minnesota Secure Choice (existing participants and potential new participants) regarding enrollment, contributions, and benefits.
  • Employers: Businesses subject to the Secure Choice mandate or program requirements, including any newly added or removed exemptions.
  • State Agencies/Administrators: Entities responsible for administering, monitoring, and enforcing the program.

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Next Steps in Legislation: If advanced, the bill would move to additional committees for hearings, amendments, and potential floor votes in the Minnesota Legislature.
  • Implementation Timing: Any modifications would specify effective dates, transition periods, and phased implementation if applicable (e.g., changes taking effect in a future enrollment year).

Potential Impacts and Considerations

  • Accessibility and Retirement Readiness: Modifications could affect ease of enrollment, cost for workers, and the effectiveness of the program in expanding retirement access.
  • Employer Burden: Changes may alter administrative complexity or financial obligations for participating employers.
  • State Fiscal Implications: Depending on modifications, there could be budgetary impact related to program administration or outreach.

If you can provide the full text or specific sections of SF 4797, I can produce a precise, clause-by-clause summary with exact statutory references, dates, and numeric provisions.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.