S. 1725 would amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and title 5, United States Code, to improve the protection of pension benefits.
Detailed Summary
Restoring Pension Promises to Workers Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to require the inclusion in gross income of all income previously deferred under a nonqualified deferred compensation plan if an employer maintaining such a plan fails to meet certain participation, vesting, and minimum benefit requirements.
Amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to: (1) deny ERISA pension plan administrators the right to recover overpayments made to plan participants and beneficiaries in cases of hardship or insignificant amounts; (2) impose a three-year limitation period for bringing any action to recover an overpayment; (3) prohibit the elimination of accrued pension plan benefits during corporate mergers and acquisitions; and (4) establish in the Department of Labor an Office of Pension Participant Advocacy to protect pension plan participants.
Amends federal employee personnel provisions to: (1) entitle former spouses of federal employees who die before establishing a valid claim for an annuity to 55% of such deferred annuity or a lump-sum payment; (2) permit divorced spouses of federal employees to collect court-awarded retirement benefits when such employees are first eligible to retire (currently, only available at the time the employee actually retires); (3) entitle certain former spouses of retired federal employees divorced prior to September 14, 1978, to a survivor annuity; and (4) give priority to a surviving spouse of a federal employee in the distribution of balances in a thrift savings account, unless such spouse consents to the designation of another beneficiary.
Status of the Legislation
Latest Major Action: 6/28/2007: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Points in Favor
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
Points Against
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
Visitor Comments
Ken AnoniMous
September 12, 2007, 8:29am (report abuse)This bill is important to correct errors caused by Plan amendmants etc during mergers and divestitures. It will avoid costly litigation on all parties behalves.
Marjorie Stout
March 9, 2008, 7:32pm (report abuse)As a former spouse of a federal employee, I am dependent upon his portion of my court ordered retirement for my ability to live in retirement without dependence upon my children. This bill would ensure that I would not have to wait until he is 80 to receive my part. He is currently an ALJ in Alabama, and plans to offset my Social Security benefit. This bill would make it possible for me to retire at a decent age. I am currently 59, married for 23 years and still single, although my former spouse has remarried. The divorce was his desire, and I felt penalized by my own government for the adherence to stipulations before I could qualify for retirement benefits, (do not remarry before the age of 55). This decided my future. It would be greatly appreciated if I could receive my portion upon my own retirement age. Thanks so much for letting me comment.
Marjorie Stout
LW
October 21, 2008, 12:37pm (report abuse)My situation is almost identical to that of Ms. Stout. I agree that the current "Spouse Equity Act" penalizes some former spouses. I, too, was not a willing party in the divorce (which involved spouse's infidelity)and my future has been compromized in ways I cannot control or are not equitable. I hope and pray that S.1725 will soon bring relief.