WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HF 4921

Minnesota Secure Choice retirement program provisions modified.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Danny Nadeau

Minnesota HF 4921 modifies the Secure Choice program to adjust administration, employer participation requirements, and enrollment rules to improve participation and program effici

Introduction and first reading, referred to State Government Finance and Policy
#retirement
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HF 4921

Summary of HF 4921 (Minnesota, 2025-2026)

Title

Minnesota Secure Choice retirement program provisions modified

Purpose and intent

HF 4921 proposes changes to Minnesota’s Secure Choice retirement program (a state-level initiative designed to provide private-sector workers with access to an automatic enrollment, payroll-deducted retirement savings plan). The bill aims to modify existing provisions to alter how the program operates, expand or adjust eligibility, funding, administration, or related administrative requirements. The exact policy levers targeted (e.g., employer participation thresholds, contribution mechanics, investment options, fiduciary standards, state oversight) are addressed within the bill’s substantive sections. The intent appears to be refining program design to improve participation, usability for employers, or fiscal/operational efficiency.

Key provisions and changes (high-level overview)

  • Program administration and governance: Revisions related to who administers the program, reporting obligations, and oversight mechanisms. This may include changes to the state agency responsible for implementation or the board structure, duties, and accountability measures.
  • Employer participation and triggers: Modifications to requirements for employers to offer or facilitate Secure Choice enrollment for eligible employees, including thresholds by firm size, exemptions, or transition timelines.
  • Employee enrollment and contributions: Adjustments to automatic enrollment defaults, employee opt-out procedures, and minimum/maximum contribution levels or escalation schedules (e.g., annual increases).
  • Plan design and investment options: Potential changes to approved investment menus, default investment choices, and fiduciary standards to protect participant assets.
  • Funding and cost allocation: Provisions detailing program funding sources, employer or employee administrative fees, state subsidies if any, and budgeting or appropriations processes.
  • Reporting and evaluation: New or revised reporting requirements to track participation rates, account balances, program costs, and outcomes for state oversight and legislative review.
  • Effective dates and phased implementation: Timeline for when changes would take effect, including any staged rollouts or transitional periods for employers and participants.

Note: The bill text would provide the precise language, including any numerical thresholds, deadlines, and fiduciary standards. The summary above reflects typical areas such bills modify and is intended to guide understanding pending the full statutory text.

Affected parties

  • Private-sector employers in Minnesota: Particularly those subject to Secure Choice enrollment requirements or transitional provisions.
  • Private-sector employees: Workers who would participate in Secure Choice accounts through automatic enrollment and payroll deductions.
  • Minnesota state agencies and program administrators: Entities responsible for implementing, supervising, and reporting on the program.
  • Benefits providers/service contractors: Firms involved in plan administration, record-keeping, and investment management linked to Secure Choice.

Procedural/timeline aspects

  • Status: Introduced and referred on 2026-04-09 to the State Government Finance and Policy committee. Co-sponsor: Danny Nadeau.
  • Next steps in process: The bill would proceed through committee hearings, potential amendments, and then floor votes in the Minnesota House of Representatives. If passed, it would move to the Senate (and similar committee processes) and, upon approval, be sent to the governor for signature or veto.
  • Effective dates: Specific effective dates and phase-in schedules would be defined in the bill’s text, including any transition periods for employers and employees affected by the changes.

If you’d like, I can pull the exact text of HF 4921 and provide a section-by-section analysis with direct quotes, defined terms, and a more granular breakdown of numerical thresholds and deadlines.

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

Sign in to ask a question.