House Appropriations committee backs keeping Vermont Saves auto-escalation at 8% in straw poll

The House Appropriations Committee held a straw poll Friday on an amendment that would prevent a change to the Vermont Saves program’s automatic contribution-escalation cap, keeping the statutory maximum at 8% rather than increasing it to 10%. Representative Donahue introduced the amendment during the committee’s March 28, 2025, meeting; Becky Wasserman of the State Treasurer’s Office testified in opposition, saying the office supports a 10% target communicated now and phased in over several years.

The committee’s action was a nonbinding straw poll to record committee sentiment, not a final floor vote. The clerk reported the straw poll result as 10 in favor and 1 opposed; the committee referred members’ questions about policy jurisdiction to the House Government Operations Committee and suggested Treasury staff contact the Senate Government Operations Committee if the change should move forward this year.

The amendment’s sponsor, Representative Donahue, said the Appropriations Committee had not been the policy committee that originally reviewed Vermont Saves and urged caution: “I think the goal to help people and encourage people to save money for retirement is superb, but I don't think we wanna unintentionally, take away people's personal choice, about, saving money, and leave them unaware, about the savings or about, this proposed, increase in the auto escalation.”

Becky Wasserman, testifying for the State Treasurer’s Office, described program rules that include an auto‑escalation provision and said the office expects any automatic increases to begin in January 2027 so everyone starts escalation at the same time. “We actually think it is really important to get that 10% in now as the program is starting,” Wasserman said. She noted Vermont is part of an interstate consortium of state auto‑IRA programs and cited the federal SECURE 2.0 Act as an example of national movement toward mandatory auto‑escalation in private plans.

Wasserman also provided program data to the committee: about 1,000 employers have registered and about 1,000 funded accounts exist in the program at the time of the meeting. She said the office has not yet sent a specific communication to savers about the 1% annual increases tied to automatic escalation and that the rules require notifying savers before any 1% increase takes effect.

Several committee members said the policy decision should be vetted first in the Government Operations Committee, which they said originally reviewed Vermont Saves, rather than in Appropriations. Representative Kaczynski and others said they were open to the amendment while urging Treasury to discuss the policy with Government Operations. One member suggested the Senate Government Operations Committee might be the appropriate vehicle if the change needs to move forward this year.

The committee’s straw poll was conducted by roll call; the clerk recorded the result as 10–1 in favor of the amendment (nonbinding). Committee members noted the change would not take effect until 2027 under current rules, giving time for additional policy review. The committee asked Treasury staff to communicate with legislative policy committees about the proposal before any binding action.

Background: Vermont Saves is the state auto‑IRA program intended to provide retirement savings access for workers who do not have workplace plans. Under the program rules explained at the meeting, automatic escalation would ramp up 1 percentage point per year once it begins, and Treasury staff indicated January 2027 as the earliest uniform start date for increases. The committee’s action was a procedural straw poll and does not by itself change statute or program rules; any statutory change would require follow‑up in the relevant policy committees and a floor vote.

The Appropriations Committee meeting lasted about 19 minutes on March 28; committee members and Treasury staff said they expect further discussion on this item in committee of jurisdiction and possibly in the Senate if the change is advanced.