Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2316)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 5, 1993
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Amendments to Pension Plan Funding Requirements Title II: Required Security for Certain Plan Amendments Title III: Miscellaneous Provisions Pension Funding Improvement Act of 1993 - Title I: Amendments to Pension Plan Funding Requirements - Amends the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to revise minimum funding standards for pension plans. Revises the additional funding requirements for pension plans that are not multiemployer plans to provide for an underfunding reduction requirement and solvency maintenance requirement. Title II: Required Security for Certain Plan Amendments - Amends IRC and ERISA to increase required funding percentages and required security under provisions for pension plan termination insurance. Applies such required funding and security provisions to multiemployer plans, as well as to other pension plans. Applies specified criminal penalties to violations of such requirements. Title III: Miscellaneous Provisions - Requires the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to submit separate reports to the Congress setting forth alternative increases in premiums that would be required for the assets of the single-employer program (established under ERISA provisions for pension plan termination insurance) to equal or exceed such program's current and expected liabilities by 2002. Amends ERISA to require inclusion in annual PBGC reports of actuarial evaluations of pension benefit guaranty funds for the next five, ten, twenty, and thirty years. (Currently, inclusion of such evaluations for the next five years only is required.) Requires such evaluations to set forth alternative premium schedules to assure that PBGC assets equal or exceed its liabilities during such periods. Authorizes the CBO to transmit a separate report analyzing and commenting upon the actuarial evaluation (and premium schedules) prepared by the PBGC, for any fiscal year the CBO deems appropriate. Authorizes the PBGC to require certain plan sponsors or members of a sponsor's controlled group to provide it with records or other information necessary to determine liabilities and assets of plans covered by ERISA plan termination insurance provisions, or the financial condition of sponsors or members of sponsors' controlled groups maintaining such plans. Applies such information requirements to a plan if: (1) its underfunding exceeds $10,000,000; (2) it has more than 2,000 participants; or (3) it has been granted minimum funding waivers in excess of $1,000,000. Treats all plans maintained by the same sponsor (or any member of such sponsor's controlled group) as one plan for purposes of such information requirements.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.298 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.298 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.298 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.298 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.