PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 24, 1999
Pension Benefits Protection and Preservation Act of 1999 - Amends the Internal Revenue Code (the Code) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to require the plan administrator of any large (100 or more participants) defined employee benefit plan (applicable plan) to notify each applicable individual of any adoption of plan amendments that may reduce future benefit accruals of one or more participants to a specified significant extent (plan amendments), with details on the change's possible effect on the individual's pension, at least 45 days before such a plan change becomes effective.Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to enforce specified age discrimination provisions relating to pensions under the Code, without regard to the portion of the preamble to a specified Treasury Decision which relates to allocation of interest adjustments through normal retirement age under a cash balance plan. Declares that such preamble is, and has been since its adoption, without the force of law.Requires applicable plans to offer, in addition to the notice and written statement of benefit change, opportunity for applicable individual participants to elect to continue benefit accruals, without regard to such plan amendments, under the former defined benefit plan instead of under a cash benefit plan.Imposes an excise tax for the failure of any applicable pension plan to offer an opportunity to applicable participants to continue benefit accruals under the former defined benefit plan in the event of significant reductions in future plan accruals. Sets the amount of such tax at 50 percent of the excess pension assets in the plan. Makes the plan liable for such tax in the case of a multiemployer plan, and the employer liable in any other case.Prohibits pension plan amendments that reduce future accrued benefits for years of service for any participants in applicable plans (large defined benefit plans with 100 or more members). Sets forth criteria, under both the Code and ERISA, for determining when a pension plan amendment by an applicable plan shall be treated as reducing the accrued benefit of a participant.
People & committees
Sen. Wellstone, Paul D. [D-MN] · D–MN
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 Finance.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11439-11440)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 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.1640 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.1640 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.1640 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.1640 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.