Pension Protection and Diversification Act of 2002
Referred to the Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 29, 2002
Pension Protection and Diversification Act of 2002 - Amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to: (1) limit to 20 percent the portion of funds which may be invested in the employer's stock and real property by an employee's individual account plans, including those which include cash or deferred arrangements under Internal Revenue Code section 401(k) and (2) allow an employee to direct the plan to divest the employee's account of such employer securities or property and to reinvest an equal amount in other assets, at any time after 90 days following allocation of employer securities or real property to the employee's individual account plan. Exempts employee stock ownership plans (ESOPS) from these new ERISA provisions.Amends Internal Revenue Code to: (1) allow employees to diversify assets in ESOPS after five years, and after they've reached age 35 (but requires a trustee-to-trustee transfer for those under age 55); and (2) reduce by 50 percent the allowable deduction for employer matching contributions to defined contribution plans made in employer securities.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.3640 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.3640 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.3640 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.3640 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.