PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 30, 2003
Multiemployer Pension Security Act of 2003 - Amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Internal Revenue Code, the National Labor Relations Act, and the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947 with respect to teamster plans and their funding.
Defines a teamster plan as a plan: (1) to which more than one employer is required to contribute; and (2) which is maintained pursuant to one or more collective bargaining agreements between The International Brotherhood Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America or its locals and more than one employer.
Declares that a teamster plan shall not be treated as a multiemployer plan, and each employer that has an obligation to contribute to a teamster plan shall be treated as a contributing sponsor maintaining a separate single-employer plan, including with respect to partition and allocation of assets and liabilities.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the assets of a teamster plan to be invested by the trustees as one master trust, and each contributing employer's share of the plan assets to be adjusted annually according to master trust accounting principles for the employer's plan contributions, benefit payments with respect to its ongoing liability and transition liability (if any), and share of investment returns and administrative expenses.
Requires the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation to guarantee 100 percent of the transition liabilities of each teamster plan. Defines transition liabilities as the sum of the accrued benefit liabilities under a teamster plan (as a whole, as if it were treated as a single multiemployer plan rather than a collection of single-employer plans) attributable to: (1) participants who are not employed in credited service for any employer under the plan; and (2) the credited service of other participants with an employer that does not have an obligation to contribute to the teamster plan.
Requires the premium rates for plan termination insurance charged by the Corporation for teamster plans to be the same as those charged for single-employer plans. States that each employer with an obligation to contribute to a teamster plan shall be responsible for paying the premiums attributable to the single-employer plan the employer is treated as maintaining. Requires any additional premium to phased in over ten plan years. Authorizes the Corporation to allow an employer to contribute all or part of such additional premium directly to the teamster plan, in lieu of payment to the Corporation.
Authorizes an employer with an obligation to contribute to a teamster plan to terminate its participation in either a standard or a distress termination.
Requires establishment of a funding standard account for each employer with an obligation to contribute to a teamster plan. Prescribes formulae for specified minimum funding of, and minimum contributions to, a teamster plan. Prohibits any increase in benefits unless a teamster plan is sufficiently funded.
People & committees
Sen. Chambliss, Saxby [R-GA] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10268-10269)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze S.1492 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.
Examine S.1492 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.
Examine S.1492 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.
Examine S.1492 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.