S-2459-119
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
What it does
This bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code to allow employees with disabilities who are eligible for ABLE accounts (tax-advantaged savings accounts under Section 529A) to elect that their employer's retirement plan contributions be redirected into their ABLE account instead. It would ensure that employer plans making this option available do not lose their qualified status under existing nondiscrimination and plan rules. The bill would also direct the Treasury Department to clarify that such employer contributions are deductible as compensation expenses and to update employer publications about ABLE account eligibility.
Who benefits
Workers with disabilities who are eligible for ABLE accounts and currently risk losing means-tested government benefits (such as Medicaid or Supplemental Security Income) if retirement plan assets push them over program asset limits — redirecting funds to an ABLE account avoids this problem. Employers who want to offer flexible benefits to workers with disabilities without restructuring their retirement plans. ABLE account program administrators who would see increased contributions. Family members and caregivers of workers with disabilities who may benefit from the individual's improved financial stability.
Who is hurt
Workers with disabilities who choose this option would forgo the tax-deferred growth and potential employer matching structures of traditional retirement accounts, which may result in lower long-term retirement savings. Other retirement plan participants could be indirectly affected if nondiscrimination rule adjustments alter plan testing outcomes. State ABLE program administrators would face increased administrative complexity in tracking employer-sourced contributions. The bill does not extend benefits to workers with disabilities who do not meet ABLE eligibility criteria (those whose disability onset occurred after age 46 under current law).
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that current law creates a harmful catch-22 for workers with disabilities: accepting employer retirement contributions can push their total assets above the eligibility thresholds for Medicaid and SSI, forcing them to choose between keeping benefits and building savings. They contend that ABLE accounts, which have higher asset-limit exclusions under means-tested programs, are a better vehicle for this population, and that the bill simply gives eligible workers a choice — it does not mandate any change — while preserving plan qualification rules so employers face no penalty for offering the option.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that redirecting retirement contributions to ABLE accounts — which have different investment structures and withdrawal rules — could leave workers with disabilities with less retirement security over time, particularly since ABLE accounts are designed for disability-related expenses rather than long-term retirement accumulation. They contend that the underlying problem (asset limits in means-tested programs) should be addressed directly through those programs rather than through a workaround in the tax code, and that the added complexity of dual-track employer contribution rules may discourage smaller employers from offering the option at all.