An Act to amend 71.63 (2), 102.07 (8) (a) and 108.02 (12) (a); to create 71.05 (6) (a) 30., 71.05 (6) (b) 57., 71.83 (1) (f), 102.01 (2) (ae), 102.01 (2) (an), 102.01 (2) (ann), 102.01 (2) (anp), 102.01 (2) (ant), 102.01 (2) (dc), 102.01 (2) (ds), 102.01 (2) (gh), 102.07 (8) (bs), 103.08, 104.01 (2) (b) 6., 108.02 (12) (ds), 224.56 and 632.985 of the statutes; Relating to: delivery network couriers and transportation network drivers, Department of Financial Institutionsâ approval to offer portable benefit accounts, providing for insurance coverage, modifying administrative rules related to accident and sickness insurance, and granting rule-making authority. (FE)
AB269 creates a new framework for “application-based drivers” working for delivery network companies and transportation network companies, such as app-based delivery couriers and rideshare drivers. The bill defines these workers and the companies that use digital networks to connect them to customers, and it establishes rules under which those drivers are not treated as employees or agents of the network company for workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance purposes. It also creates a new portable benefits account system that eligible drivers may use to save money for retirement, income replacement, or certain personal needs.
Under the bill, network companies may—but are not required to—offer portable benefit accounts and may make contributions to them. If they do, eligible drivers who meet a quarterly earnings threshold can receive company contributions equal to 4 percent of prior-quarter earnings, and drivers may also elect to contribute their own earnings. The accounts may be used for specified purposes, including income replacement after illness, accident, childbirth, declared emergencies, or a loss of earnings; transfers to an IRA; and premiums for health, vision, or dental insurance. The bill also authorizes the Department of Financial Institutions to approve financial services providers to administer these accounts and allows rulemaking to implement the program.
AB269 further requires or permits network companies to make accident and sickness insurance, and occupational accident insurance, available to application-based drivers. The occupational accident coverage must meet minimum benefit levels, including at least $1 million in aggregate coverage, medical benefits, disability income, and accidental death benefits. The bill also amends tax law to allow contributions to portable benefit accounts to be subtracted from income and to tax certain nonqualified distributions, and it creates a penalty for improper use of account distributions.
The bill’s broader legal effect is to carve out app-based drivers from some traditional employment classifications while creating a separate benefits and insurance structure for them. It amends workers’ compensation, unemployment insurance, income tax, and insurance statutes, and it also directs changes to administrative insurance rules. Several provisions are nonseverable, meaning they fall away if the driver-classification exclusion is struck down by a court.
The general sentiment reflected in the legislative history is that the bill had enough support to pass both chambers, but it ultimately did not become law because it failed to override the governor’s objections. The recorded votes show passage in the Assembly and Senate, suggesting substantial legislative backing. The main point of contention appears to be the underlying policy choice to classify app-based drivers as independent contractors rather than employees, with the bill pairing that exclusion with portable benefits and insurance as a compromise approach. That structure likely divided supporters who favored flexibility for platform work and opponents concerned about reduced labor protections and benefits.
AB269 would have significantly altered Wisconsin law by creating a statutory category for application-based drivers and excluding them from employee status for certain labor-law purposes when network companies do not impose specified controls. It would have amended workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance definitions, added a new portable benefits account chapter, authorized DFI approval of account providers, and created new tax treatment for contributions and improper distributions. It also would have expanded insurance-related options and rulemaking authority for accident, sickness, and occupational accident coverage tied to app-based work.
The bill appears to have had meaningful bipartisan or cross-chamber support, as it passed both the Assembly and Senate on June 18, 2025. However, the final status shows it failed to pass notwithstanding the governor’s objections, indicating that executive opposition was strong enough to block enactment. Overall, the discussion implied by the bill’s structure suggests a compromise-oriented approach: preserve contractor status for platform workers while adding portable benefits and insurance protections.
The central controversy is worker classification. Supporters likely viewed the bill as a way to preserve flexibility for delivery and rideshare platforms while creating a new benefits model for app-based workers. Opponents likely objected to the exclusion of application-based drivers from employee status, because that can limit access to workers’ compensation, unemployment insurance, and other employment protections. There may also have been concern about the bill’s nonseverability clauses, which tie the benefits framework to the classification exclusion, and about whether the portable benefits system and insurance requirements are an adequate substitute for traditional employment rights.