House Panel Advances Bill to Torpedo DOL Fiduciary Rule

The House Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Subcommittee passed by voice vote Thursday proposed Fiscal year 2025 funding legislation that would prevent the Department of Labor from using any funds to administer, implement or enforce its new fiduciary rule and related prohibited transaction exemptions.

The House Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions, chaired by Rep. Bob Good, R-Va., held a hearing Thursday to examine the policies and priorities of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration. Lisa Gomez, head of EBSA, testified.

Wayne Chopus, president and CEO of the Insured Retirement Institute, said Wednesday in a statement that IRI “supports Congress’ efforts to stop DOL’s harmful retirement security rule. These policy riders will help to preserve consumers’ access to much-needed financial information and guidance to effectively plan for retirement.”

Several insurance groups have filed lawsuits against Labor’s fiduciary rule.

On May 24, nine insurance trade groups filed a suit attacking the rule in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

The groups have accused the department of rushing to adopt the new retirement investment advice fiduciary definition regulations without meeting federal Administrative Procedure Act requirements, and without analyzing impact data in an adequate way while conducting a cost-benefit analysis.

The groups said Thursday in a statement that the subcommittee’s action “sends a signal that the fiduciary-only regulation is out of line with Congress’s intent to expand retirement security for all Americans…The fiduciary-only regulation will reduce consumer access to professional financial guidance and critical protected lifetime income options that annuities provide at a time when they are needed most.”

On May 22, the Federation of Americans for Consumer Choice and several independent insurance agents filed for a preliminary injunction in federal court, seeking to force Labor to delay implementation of the rule.

The filing — the group’s second — in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas argues that Labor’s rule will cause too much damage if it goes into effect, so the court needs to delay its implementation until FACC’s existing case against Labor’s PTE 2020-02 on rollover advice is resolved.