Relative to the SMART plan
This bill makes several changes to Massachusetts law governing the state deferred compensation program and related local governmental deferred compensation plans, commonly referred to as the SMART plan. It first updates terminology in chapter 29, section 64, replacing the phrase “independent contractors” with “contracted employees.” It also authorizes the state treasurer to adopt annual and supplemental budgets for the deferred compensation program, including salaries for treasury employees who administer the program, and provides that those employees are members of the Massachusetts state employees’ retirement system if their compensation is paid from the program’s administrative expense account.
The bill then authorizes automatic enrollment in the deferred compensation program for eligible employees, without requiring advance authorization, and expressly exempts that feature from the Massachusetts Wage Act and any other state-law or local-law requirement for employee authorization of payroll deductions. For the state program, automatic enrollment would apply only to new Commonwealth employees hired on or after June 1, 2022, and for certain 403(b)-eligible employees only if the agency or department affirmatively elects to use it. For governmental bodies using the local deferred compensation program under section 64B, automatic enrollment would be optional and would apply only to new employees hired on or after June 1, 2024 if the local employer chooses to implement it.
The bill would amend chapter 29 of the General Laws, primarily sections 64 and 64B, to expand administrative authority over the SMART deferred compensation program and to create a statutory framework for automatic enrollment and auto-escalation. It would also carve out an explicit exception to the Massachusetts Wage Act and similar authorization requirements, allowing payroll deductions for retirement savings to begin automatically under the plan terms. In practice, the measure would affect the state treasurer, treasury staff administering the program, Commonwealth agencies, participating governmental bodies, and employees eligible for deferred compensation plans, especially new hires.
The available record shows no committee transcript, recorded vote, or formal opposition in the materials provided, so there is no documented debate to gauge broad sentiment. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears aimed at improving participation in retirement savings through automatic enrollment and administrative flexibility, which typically suggests a policy rationale focused on convenience and increased savings participation. Because no votes or hearing comments are included, the overall sentiment cannot be characterized beyond the bill’s apparent pro-administration, pro-enrollment design.
The main potential points of contention are the automatic enrollment provisions and the explicit exemption from employee authorization requirements under the Wage Act and related laws. Supporters would likely emphasize higher retirement savings participation, easier administration, and alignment with modern default-enrollment practices. Opponents or skeptics could focus on employee consent, payroll deduction autonomy, the 90-day opt-out structure, and the expansion of treasury authority and budgetary flexibility. Another possible issue is the differing treatment of state employees, 403(b)-eligible employees, and local governmental body employees, since implementation is partly elective and partly limited by hire date.