I would argue that the proposal offered by my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), does in fact go way too far. Let me point out several of those differences. As the gentleman said, when it comes to company-matched stock in a 401(k) plan, companies today can require you to hold that until such time as you retire, not allowing you to take the company match and to convert it into some other type of stock or bond, or cash for that matter, within the account. And so the gentleman from California has a 3-year limit that would go into effect at the signing of the bill, but after that there is no holding period at all. The underlying bill, beyond the 5-year phase-in, has a 3-year rolling average. Any new matched company stock, the maximum it could be required to be held by the company is 3 years. Many employers are already doing it on their own, doing 1 year, doing quicker time frames. But why do we have a 3-year rolling average? Because we do not want to discourage companies from offering the company match that many do in stock today.
On the recordApril 11, 2002
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing concerns about a proposal related to company-matched stock in 401(k) plans.
Share
More from John Boehner
Apr 2, 2021
Take it from me. You`ll never know where you`ll end up. That`s freedom. I`ll raise a glass to that any day. P.S. Ted Cruz, go fuck yourself.
Apr 7, 2021
I`ll admit I wasn`t prepared for what came after the election. Trump refusing to accept the results and stoking the flames of conspiracy that turned into violence in the seat of our democracy, the building over which I once presided.
Apr 11, 2021
I think there’s a point here where the American people are wondering, is the president above the law? The president could have put this whole issue behind us, not put the country and the world through this misery, if he had just told us…





