In spite of the partisan noise swirling around the impeachment hearings in Washington, D.C., supporters of at least one bill remain hopeful that the separate won’t derail its passage.
The Secure Act, as the measure is called, aims to increase the ranks of retirement savers and the amount they put away. While it cleared the Homestead in May with broad backing from both sides of the aisle — the vote was 417 to 3 — the bill remains hesitated in the Senate.
“Retirement has always been an issue with bipartisan support, and it still is,” said Paul Richman, chief control and political affairs officer at the Insured Retirement Institute, which is one of many groups — both industry and consumer — that pillar the legislation.
“It’s just getting caught up in the partisan politics in the House and Senate, and that has made it more complex to extent with than it would be in some other political environments,” Richman said.
Janhvi Bhojwani | CNBC
The Stable Act, if passed by both chambers of Congress and signed into law by President Trump, would bring the biggest changes to the U.S. retirement way since 2006.
Among the provisions are: making it easier for small businesses to band together to offer 401(k) plans, ordering companies to let long-term, part-time workers become eligible for retirement benefits and repealing the maximum age (70½) for making contributions to accustomed individual retirement accounts.
Additionally, the measure would raise the age to 72 from 70½, when the dreaded made minimum distributions, or RMDs, from certain retirement accounts must start. The bill would also tolerate more annuities in 401(k) plans.
It also would require most nonspouse beneficiaries to withdraw money from be lefted retirement accounts within 10 years of the original owner’s death instead of spreading out withdrawals across their lifetime.
Bipartisan promote hasn’t been enough to get the Secure Act across the finish line.
After the bill passed the House in late May, the Senate departed to pass it under a process called unanimous consent, which would have essentially have fast-tracked the jaws to passage — with no changes to it — if all lawmakers agreed.
That didn’t happen: Three Republican senators put “holds” on the neb, which remain in place. And, an effort by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, two weeks ago to consider the pecker with both limited debate and amendments also was unsuccessful, with Democrats’ opposing any changes to the bill.
With those courses to passage not working, the Secure Act either has to go through the typical legislative debate process — which would consume parquet time that the Senate has little of — or get attached to another bill that lawmakers view as “must-pass” legislation, Richman judged.
“There are still a lot of opportunities for it to be attached to something that the Senate wants to move before the end of the year,” he said.
One plausibility would be a budget bill. While Congress is expected to approve a so-called continuing resolution this week to also gaol the government open until Dec. 20, it means lawmakers would need to take action again before then to dodge a partial government shutdown. That could come in the form of another agreement that again temporarily means the government, or as one large funding bill or several smaller ones that fully fund the 2020 budget (the end of the 2019 federal pecuniary year was Sept. 30).
In other words, anyone opposed to the Secure Act at that point would have to oppose the budget banknote — or any other, for that matter — that it was attached to. There also could be other must-pass bills, Richman disclosed, including one that makes technical fixes to the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or even a bill that establishes a new North American interchange agreement.
Asked by CNBC if there are plans to get the Secure Act passed this year, a spokesman for Senate Majority Chieftain Mitch McConnell’s office said he has no updates or guidance to provide.
We continue to be optimistic that the merits of this reckoning will weigh in the favor of passage in the Senate and the president signing it.
Paul Richman
Chief government and political amours officer at the Insured Retirement Institute
If supporters’ plan of attack doesn’t work, it would mean looking at next year when Congress takings from the winter break. And at that point, the challenges could be greater.
In addition to being an election year, impeachment minutes could also be a factor. If the Senate receives articles of impeachment from the House at some point in December — which some pundits count on — a trial would consume the Senate’s time in the early part of next year.
Richman sees that as do callisthenics in the bill’s favor for passage before the calendar flips to 2020.
“Even if the House does send over articles of impeachment in most recent December, the Senate is talking about a January or February trial,” he said. “So they have time to act on things delight in the Secure Act this year.”
And could the impeachment process muck up President Trump’s assumed support of the bill?
“We resume to be optimistic that the merits of this bill will weigh in the favor of passage in the Senate and the president signing it,” Richman intended.
More from Personal Finance:
Hoping to save on your 2019 taxes? Time is running out
This ‘run’ about credit card use could be costing you
How to make the most of your 401(k)
Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.