Summary — HB 5179 (Worker's compensation: death benefits; conclusive presumption of dependency)
Bill number: HB 5179
Introduced: March 14, 2025 (reproduced/introduced again Oct 30, 2025)
Subject: Workers’ disability compensation act of 1969 — death benefits and dependency presumptions
Sections amended: MCL 418.321, 418.331, 418.335, 418.345, 418.356 (1969 PA 317)
Current status (as recorded): Read first time 4/7/2025; referred to committee (Public Education initially; later reproduced 10/30/2025 and referred to Committee on Economic Competitiveness). Introduced Oct 30, 2025 by Rep. Mai Xiong (list of cosponsors included).
Purpose
- To revise payment rules for fatal workers’ compensation claims and to expand/clarify who is conclusively presumed to be dependent on a deceased employee for purposes of death benefits.
Key provisions (what the bill would do)
- Death benefit amount and duration
- Requires employers to pay dependents a weekly benefit equal to 80% of the deceased employee’s after‑tax average weekly wage (subject to statutory maximums/minimums) for a period of 500 weeks from the date of death.
- If, at the end of the 500‑week period, a wholly or partially dependent person is under age 21, a workers’ compensation magistrate may order continued payments (or a portion) until that person reaches age 21.
Conclusive presumption of dependency (spouse and children)
- The employee’s spouse who was living with the employee at death is conclusively presumed wholly dependent for 208 weeks after death; if ongoing dependency is shown, payments may continue for 500 weeks.
- Children are addressed with expanded age language: a child under age 18 is conclusively presumed wholly dependent if living with the parent at death; children 18 or older remain included if physically or mentally incapacitated from earning. (Text adjusts age thresholds/wording to clarify presumptions for children and certain non‑custodial children.)
Distribution and guardianship protections
- Death benefits among wholly dependent persons are to be divided equally.
- When a surviving spouse receives payments on behalf of the decedent’s own children, those payments are to be used for the children; a magistrate may order child shares paid to a guardian or representative if the spouse is not properly caring for the children.
- Defines who may be treated as a dependent (family members and certain relatives such as widower/widow, lineal descendants, ancestors, siblings).
Remarriage of dependent spouse
- If a dependent spouse receiving compensation remarries, payments cease upon payment of the balance to which the spouse would otherwise be entitled, not to exceed a $500 lump sum; remaining payments (if any) are payable to other dependents as provided.
Who would be affected
- Primary: surviving spouses, children, and other dependents of workers who die from work‑related injuries.
- Secondary: employers and workers’ compensation insurers, who would be responsible for making the higher/extended payments; guardians or legal representatives of minor children; workers’ compensation magistrates (additional determinations on continued payments, guardianship direction).
- Potential fiscal effect: extending benefit duration and fixing a benefit at 80% of after‑tax average weekly wage (subject to max/min) is likely to increase benefit liabilities and could increase costs to employers and insurers (specific fiscal estimates would require actuarial analysis).
Procedural/timeline notes
- Bill amends multiple sections of the Workers’ Disability Compensation Act (1969 PA 317). As of the latest recorded actions, it has been introduced/reproduced and referred to legislative committee(s) but is not enacted. Further committee review, potential hearings, amendments, and votes would be required before enactment.
Limitations/uncertainties
- The bill text as reproduced contains editorial formatting artifacts and some overlapping/duplicative lines; the summary above follows the substantive provisions as presented. Exact interaction with existing statutory maximum/minimum rates and current law standards would require side‑by‑side statutory comparison and fiscal analysis.
