H. Rpt. 119-539 accompanies the "Ensuring Workers Get Paid Act of 2025" — legislation that falls within the Education and Workforce Committee's jurisdiction. Committee reports serve as the official legislative history of a bill, documenting what the legislation would do and why the committee recommends passage. Reports of this kind include the committee's section-by-section analysis, any amendments adopted during markup, the Congressional Budget Office cost estimate, dissenting views from minority members, and the legal basis for the legislation. Courts and agencies consult committee reports when interpreting enacted laws, making these documents important beyond the immediate legislative moment.
Official report text. Use Ctrl+F / Cmd+F to search within the document.
House Report 119-539 - ENSURING WORKERS GET PAID ACT OF 2025
[House Report 119-539]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
119th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 119-539
======================================================================
ENSURING WORKERS GET PAID ACT OF 2025
_______
March 3, 2026.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Walberg, from the Committee on Education and Workforce, submitted
the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 2299]
The Committee on Education and Workforce, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 2299) to establish the Payroll Audit
Independent Determination program in the Department of Labor,
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of
2025''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) In 2018, the Department of Labor launched the nationwide
Payroll Audit Independent Determination pilot program (referred
to in this section as the ``PAID pilot program'').
(2) The Secretary of Labor, acting through the Administrator
of the Wage and Hour Division, established the PAID pilot
program to complement enforcement and compliance assistance
tools undertaken by the Wage and Hour Division of the
Department of Labor.
(3) The Secretary has a longstanding practice of providing
self-audit and office audit programs, as noted by Secretary
Marty Walsh in a response for the record following a hearing
before the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of
Representatives on June 9, 2021.
(4) The Wage and Hour Division, through the PAID pilot
program, worked with employers on a voluntary basis to remedy
unintentional violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), which is the Federal statute
establishing minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and
youth-employment requirements affecting employees in the
private sector and in Federal, State, and local governments.
(5) The PAID pilot program yielded positive results for
employers and employees. Between April 1, 2018, and September
15, 2019, the Wage and Hour Division concluded 74 PAID pilot
program cases, representing less than one percent of all
compliance actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938,
with a total of $4,131,238 in back wages paid to 7,429
employees through such PAID pilot program cases.
(6) Self-audits through the PAID pilot program by employers
returned more back wages to employees in less time than
compliance actions overall. In fact, during the period
described in paragraph (5)--
(A) the average back wages paid per case for PAID
pilot program cases ($55,828) were more than 4 times
the average back wages paid per compliance action
($11,355);
(B) the average back wages paid per enforcement hour
for PAID pilot program cases ($2,864) was more than 10
times greater than the average back wages paid per
enforcement hour for compliance actions ($279);
(C) on average, nearly 10 times more employees
received back wages in each PAID pilot program case
than in investigations conducted using traditional
methods;
(D) self-audits through the PAID pilot program
averaged 19 hours per case as compared to 41 hours per
case for the Secretary conducted using traditional
methods; and
(E) self-audits through the PAID pilot program
reached employers that the Wage and Hour Division would
not typically prioritize for enforcement, including
government establishments and industry sectors with
higher-wage occupations.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Affected employee.--The term ``affected employee'' means
an employee affected by a violation of a minimum wage or
overtime hours requirement of the Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), excluding any employee subject to
prevailing wage requirements under the H-1B, H-2B, or H-2A visa
programs, subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United
States Code (commonly referred to as the ``Davis-Bacon Act''),
or chapter 67 of title 41, United States Code (commonly known
as the ``Service Contract Act'').
(2) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division of the Department
of Labor.
(3) Employee.--The term ``employee''--
(A) has the meaning given such term in section 3 of
the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203);
and
(B) with respect to an employer, includes a former
employee of such employer.
(4) Employer.--The term ``employer'' has the meaning given
such term in section 3 of such Act.
(5) Good faith.--The term ``good faith'' means, with respect
to an employer applying for participation in the Payroll Audit
Independent Determination program established under section 4,
that such employer is not, at the time such employer submits an
application for such program--
(A) under investigation by the Secretary for an
alleged violation of a minimum wage or overtime hours
requirement of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 201 et seq.); or
(B) subject to a lawsuit related to an alleged
violation of such a requirement.
(6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
Labor.
(7) Self-audit.--The term ``self-audit'' means an audit
conducted by an employer to resolve inaccuracies by the
employer in the computation of wages and overtime compensation
required under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 within the
statute of limitations described in section 6(a) of the Portal-
to-Portal Act of 1947 (29 U.S.C. 255(a)).
SEC. 4. PAYROLL AUDIT INDEPENDENT DETERMINATION PROGRAM.
(a) Program Establishment.--The Administrator shall establish a
Payroll Audit Independent Determination program (referred to in this
section as the ``program'') to foster collaboration with employers that
inadvertently violate the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C.
201 et seq.) to voluntarily remedy, within the statute of limitations
described in section 6(a) of the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947 (29
U.S.C. 255(a)), unpaid minimum wages or overtime compensation owed to
any affected employee under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
(b) Application Requirements.--
(1) Resources for compliance assistance.--Not later than 30
days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator
shall make available to employers resources for assistance in
complying with the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, including
content regarding wage and hour requirements, which shall be
offered online, through printed materials, and through other
outreach activities.
(2) Application.--An employer seeking to participate in the
program shall submit an application to the Administrator that
includes--
(A) materials related to and the results of a self-
audit, including--
(i) an identification of any practice of such
employer identified in a self-audit that may
violate a minimum wage or overtime compensation
requirement of the Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938; and
(ii) a list of each employee who may be an
affected employee with respect to such
violation, including--
(I) the period of time such employee
would have been affected by such
violation;
(II) payroll records related to such
employee for such period with
information on the hours of work
performed by such employee;
(III) calculations of unpaid minimum
wages or overtime compensation owed to
such employee under the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 with a
description of the methodology of such
calculation and supporting evidence;
and
(IV) contact information for such
employee;
(B) an explanation of the scope of potential
violations of a minimum wage or overtime compensation
requirement of such Act for inclusion in a release of
claims under subsection (d);
(C) an assurance that any practice of such employer
that violates a minimum wage or overtime compensation
requirement of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
that is identified in the self-audit has been corrected
to comply with such Act;
(D) an assurance that such employer has, prior to
submitting such application, reviewed the compliance
assistance resources made available under paragraph (1)
and all program information, terms, and requirements;
(E) an assurance that, on the date of submission of
such application, such employer--
(i) is not involved in any litigation
regarding any practice of such employer that is
identified in the self-audit; and
(ii) has not received any communications from
an employee or a representative of an employee
seeking to litigate or settle claims related to
any such practice; and
(F) an assurance that no employee listed in
subparagraph (A)(ii) is subject to a prevailing wage
requirement under the H-1B, H-2B, or H-2A visa
programs, subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40,
United States Code (commonly referred to as the
``Davis-Bacon Act''), or chapter 67 of title 41, United
States Code (commonly known as the ``Service Contract
Act'').
(c) Application Review and Approval.--
(1) Review and amendment.--The Administrator shall review
each application submitted by an employer under subsection
(b)(2). As part of such review, the Administrator shall--
(A) as necessary, consult with such employer
regarding--
(i) the self-audit and supporting materials
submitted in the application; and
(ii) the process for approval of such
application and settlement of unpaid minimum
wages or overtime compensation owed to any
affected employee under the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.);
(B) inform such employer in a timely manner and prior
to a determination on the approval of the application
if additional information is needed to assess the
unpaid minimum wages or overtime compensation owed to
any affected employee for the violations of such Act
identified in the application through the self-audit;
and
(C) provide such employer an opportunity to amend
such application to revise the scope of the practices
of such employer that violate a minimum wage or
overtime compensation requirement of the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 that are identified in the
application through self-audit, to update the list of
affected employees with respect to the practices at
issue in the self-audit, and to update the calculations
of unpaid minimum wages or overtime compensation owed
to any affected employee as a result of such
violations.
(2) Approval.--
(A) In general.--If the conditions under subparagraph
(B) are satisfied with respect to an application
submitted under subsection (b)(2), the Administrator
shall--
(i) approve the application--
(I) in the case the application has
not been amended under paragraph
(1)(C), not later than 30 days after
such submission; or
(II) in the case the application has
been amended under paragraph (1)(C),
not later than 30 days after the date
of submission of such amended
application; and
(ii) supervise the settlement under
subsection (d), including the payment of any
unpaid minimum wages or overtime compensation
under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 201 et seq.) required through such
settlement.
(B) Conditions for approval.--An application
submitted under subsection (b)(2) shall be approved
under subparagraph (A) if--
(i) within the scope of the violations
identified by the employer through the
application or an amendment to the application
under paragraph (1)(C), the Administrator
verifies that the self-audit and calculation of
unpaid minimum wages or overtime compensation
owed to any affected employee under the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938 submitted in such
application or amendment are accurate; and
(ii) the employer submitting the
application--
(I) is determined to be acting in
good faith regarding violations of the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
identified in such application or
amendment;
(II) has not been found by the
Administrator or any court of law to
have violated a minimum wage or
overtime compensation requirement of
such Act during the 5 years immediately
preceding submission of such
application; and
(III) has not been approved for
participation in the program prior to
the submission of such application,
unless--
(aa) such participation was
for a distinct violation of the
Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938 than the practice
identified in the self-audit
under subsection (b)(2); and
(bb) such employer has
submitted the necessary
materials for the Administrator
to verify that such employer is
not engaging in the practice
addressed by the previous
participation of the employer
in the program.
(d) Settlement.--
(1) In general.--For each employer that submits an
application under subsection (b)(2) that is approved under
subsection (c)(2), the Administrator shall--
(A) provide to the employer a description of the
scope of the potential release of claims for violations
of minimum wage or overtime compensation requirements
of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201
et seq.) and a summary of any unpaid minimum wages or
overtime compensation owed to each affected employee
under such Act for such violations; and
(B) issue a release form to each affected employee of
such employer that describes the settlement terms,
which shall include a written explanation of--
(i) the waiver under paragraph (2)(B); and
(ii) the right of the affected employee
receiving the offer for settlement to decline
the offer for settlement and preserve any
private right of action of the employee to
recover any unpaid minimum wages or overtime
compensation owed to the employee under the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 as a result of
such violations.
(2) Acceptance of settlement.--
(A) In general.--An affected employee offered a
settlement through a release form under paragraph
(1)(B) may accept or decline the offer.
(B) Waiver of private right of action.--The
acceptance by an affected employee of an offer of
settlement under subparagraph (A) shall, upon payment
in full of any amounts owed to the employee under the
settlement, constitute a waiver by such employee of any
right such employee may have under section 16 of the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 216) to a
private right of action to recover unpaid minimum wages
or overtime compensation, including any liquidated
damages, for the violations addressed by the
settlement.
(3) Payment of settlement.--For each affected employee that
accepts a settlement through a release form under paragraph
(1)(B), the employer shall--
(A) pay such employee the full amount of unpaid
minimum wages or overtime compensation owed to such
employee under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 201 et seq.) for the violations addressed in the
settlement; and
(B) submit proof of payment of such full amount to
the Administrator.
(e) Additional Requirements.--
(1) Denials.--In the case of an application submitted by an
employer under subsection (b)(2) and not approved under
subsection (c)(2), the Administrator may not--
(A) use information submitted in the application in
an investigation against the employer;
(B) use the fact such employer applied to the program
as a basis for any future investigation, except in a
case in which the Administrator has reason to believe
that the health and safety of an employee is at risk
due to an alleged violation related to a requirement
enforced by the Secretary involving child labor,
agricultural worker protections, or housing or
transportation requirements under the H-2A or H-2B visa
programs; or
(C) communicate to any affected employee of such
employer in response to receipt of such application to
notify such employee of the private right of action of
such employee to resolve potential violations of the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et
seq.), particularly with respect to the wage practices
at issue in the self-audit.
(2) Expansion of scope.--The Administrator may not expand the
scope of the violations to be investigated or settled through
an employer's participation in the program beyond the
violations identified by the employer in the application
submitted by the employer under subsection (b)(2) or the
amended application submitted by the employer under subsection
(c)(1)(C).
(3) No payments required.--The Administrator may not require
any form of payment by an employer to apply, qualify, or
participate in the program.
(4) Exemption from discovery.--Any information submitted in
an application to the program under subsection (b)(2), or an
amendment to such application under subsection (c)(1)(C), may
not be subject to discovery in a Federal or State court
proceeding without the consent of the employer that submitted
the application.
(f) Retaliation.--Section 15(a)(3) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938 (29 U.S.C. 215(a)(3)) is amended by inserting before the semicolon
the following: ``, or has accepted or declined to accept an offer for
settlement under section 4(d) of the Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of
2025''.
Purpose
To establish the Payroll Audit Independent Determination
(PAID) program at the Department of Labor (DOL).
Committee Action
116TH CONGRESS
First Session--Hearing
On May 1, 2019, the Committee on Education and Labor held a
hearing entitled ``Examining the Policies and Priorities of the
U.S. Department of Labor,'' which included a discussion of the
PAID program. The sole witness was the Honorable Alexander
Acosta, Secretary, DOL.
117TH CONGRESS
First Session--Legislative Action
On October 26, 2021, Representative Elise Stefanik (R-NY)
introduced H.R. 5743, the Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of
2021, with Representatives Jackie Walorski (R-IN), Glenn
Grothman (R-WI), and Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA) as
original cosponsors. The bill was referred to the Committee on
Education and Labor.
118TH CONGRESS
First Session--Legislative Action
On January 26, 2023, Representative Stefanik introduced
H.R. 572, the Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2023, with
Representatives Miller-Meeks, Pat Fallon (R-TX), James R. Baird
(R-IN), Claudia Tenney (R-NY), Chuck Edwards (R-NC), Tracey
Mann (R-KS), and Brett Guthrie (R-KY) as original cosponsors.
The bill was referred to the Committee on Education and the
Workforce.
119TH CONGRESS
First Session--Hearing
On March 25, 2025, the Subcommittee on Workforce
Protections held a hearing entitled ``The Future of Wage Laws:
Assessing the FLSA's Effectiveness, Challenges, and
Opportunities,'' which included a discussion of the PAID
program. Witnesses were Ms. Tammy McCutchen, Senior Affiliate,
Resolution Economics, New Market, Tennessee; Ms. Paige Boughan,
Senior Vice President and Director of Human Resources, Farmers
and Merchants Bank, Hampstead, Maryland, on behalf of the
Society for Human Resource Management; Mr. Andrew Stettner,
Director of Economy and Jobs, The Century Foundation,
Washington, D.C.; and Mr. Jonathan Wolfson, Chief Legal Officer
and Policy Director, Cicero Institute, Richmond, Virginia.
First Session--Legislative Action
On March 24, 2025, Representative Glenn Grothman (R-WI)
introduced H.R. 2299, the Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of
2025, which was referred to the Committee on Education and
Workforce. On November 20, 2025, the Committee considered H.R.
2299 in legislative session and reported it favorably, as
amended, to the House of Representatives by a recorded vote of
20 to 15. The Committee considered the following amendments to
H.R. 2299:
1. Representative Grothman offered an amendment in
the nature of a substitute making a technical change to
the bill. The amendment passed by voice vote.
2. Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) offered a
substitute amendment striking all of the text of the
underlying bill and replacing with the Wage Theft
Prevention and Wage Recovery Act, which requires
employers to make certain disclosures to employees of
the terms of their employment, to provide such
employees with regular pay stubs, to make a final
payment to an employee for uncompensated work hours
within 14 days of the employee's termination, and to
allow employees access to wage records; makes wages
specified in an employment contract which were unpaid
recoverable through civil enforcement; establishes new
and increased civil and criminal penalties for
violations of overtime or minimum wage requirements,
including referral to the Department of Justice for
criminal prosecution of employers who engage in
underpayment of wages, falsification of wage records,
or retaliation against employees; and requires DOL's
Wage and Hour Division to provide grants to specified
organizations, including nonprofits and educational
institutions, to support efforts to prevent and reduce
violations of wage-and-hour laws. The amendment failed
by a recorded vote of 15 to 19.
Committee Views
Introduction
DOL's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) enforces several
important statutes that provide employees with certain
workforce protections and with which employers must maintain
compliance regarding pay and leave. H.R. 2299, the Ensuring
Workers Get PAID Act of 2025, would formally establish the
Payroll Independent Audit Determination program at WHD to allow
employers to self-report compliance issues to WHD and quickly
remedy those issues so that employees are paid in full.
Fair Labor Standards Act
Enacted in 1938 during the New Deal era, the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA)\1\ is the primary federal statute
establishing standards for minimum wage, overtime pay, child
labor, recordkeeping,\2\ and other wage and hour standards
covering over 140 million individuals,\3\ including most
private and public-sector employees. Under the FLSA, employers
must pay covered employees no less than the federal minimum
wage of $7.25 for all hours worked and overtime pay of time-
and-one-half an employee's regular rate of pay for hours worked
in excess of 40 in a given workweek. These requirements are
triggered whenever an employee is ``suffer[ed] or permit[ted]
to work'' directly or indirectly for the benefit of an
employer.\4\ The WHD is responsible for administering and
enforcing the FLSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\29 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 201-262.
\2\The FLSA specifically requires employers to maintain adequate
records reflecting covered employees' hours of work and pay for all
hours worked. 29 U.S.C. Sec. 211(c).
\3\https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime/rulemaking/small-
entity-compliance-guide.
\4\29 U.S.C. Sec. 203(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FLSA exempts from its minimum wage and overtime
requirements certain classes of employees and contains specific
``duties tests'' and salary thresholds to determine whether
employees fall within those classes. The law also contains
certain job-specific exemptions from these requirements.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/compliance-assistance/handy-
reference-guide-flsa#8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress delegated authority to DOL to interpret the FLSA
via regulations; however, state wage-and-hour laws are not
preempted by the FLSA, so long as states' laws are more
``protective'' of employees. In addition, the FLSA authorizes
enforcement actions by DOL and private litigation by employees
against employers, in which court interpretations further shape
the contours of the law. This convergence of the FLSA's
requirements, its regulations, state laws, and litigation has
created a complex and burdensome system under which it is
difficult both for employers and employees to determine benefit
eligibility, and for DOL to administer the law promptly and
fairly.
Family and Medical Leave Act
Under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA),\6\ employers
with 50 or more employees are required to provide up to 12
weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave from the employee's job in
a 12-month period for specific purposes: (1) attend and care
for the birth or adoption of a child; (2) receive care for
one's own serious health condition; (3) care for an immediate
family member with a serious health condition; and (4) care for
qualified military exigencies arising from the fact that the
employee's spouse, child, or parent is a military member on
active duty. To qualify for FMLA leave, an employee must have
worked for the employer for at least one year and have worked
at least 1,250 hours in the year immediately prior to taking
FMLA leave.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\29 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2601-2654.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical FMLA leave (unrelated to birth or adoption) may be
taken for a qualifying ``serious health condition'' and either
in one 12-week period or intermittently as needed. Preexisting
group health benefits must be maintained during the employee's
absence under the same conditions that were in place prior to
taking leave. The FMLA additionally provides up to 26 weeks of
leave for the care of a covered military servicemember with a
serious injury or illness that was sustained while on active
duty.
Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) Program
In March 2018, DOL launched the PAID program to provide an
efficient method for employers to proactively rectify
inadvertent overtime and minimum wage violations under the FLSA
and, in limited circumstances, under the FMLA. The PAID program
encouraged employers to conduct payroll self-audits and
voluntarily self-report any discovered FLSA violations to DOL
in order to quickly resolve claims and improve compliance.\7\
This resulted in employees receiving 100 percent of the back
wages they were owed in a timely manner, as opposed to costly
and lengthy DOL investigations and enforcement. During the
first Trump administration (2017-2021), back wages paid to
employees under the PAID program amounted to more than four
times the average back wages paid to employees in a traditional
DOL investigation.\8\ In her March 25, 2025, testimony at a
Subcommittee on Workforce Protections hearing, Ms. Tammy
McCutchen, former Administrator of WHD, recommended that
Congress codify ``a new program, such as the former PAID
program, allowing employers to ask the Labor Department to
supervise the payment of back wages, as proposed by Rep.
Stefanik in H.R. 5743 [Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2021
(117th Congress)].''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/paid.
\8\https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/whd/whd20190926-0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
H.R. 2299 prevents future administrations from eliminating
the PAID program. The bill enhances DOL's ability to focus
resources efficiently and deliver back wages to employees
faster. It also promotes a cooperative approach where the
government and employers work together to uphold wage
compliance.
H.R. 2299 Section-by-Section Summary
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 identifies the bill's short title as the Ensuring
Workers Get PAID Act of 2025.
Section 2. Findings
Section 2 makes the following findings regarding the 2018
PAID program's success:
In 2018, DOL launched the PAID program.
The Secretary of Labor and Wage and Hour
Administrator established the program to complement
enforcement and compliance assistance tools at DOL.
DOL has a longstanding practice of providing
self-audit tools for employers.
Starting in 2018, DOL's Wage and Hour
Division worked with employers to identify potential
violations of the FLSA and yielded 74 PAID pilot
program cases totaling over $4 million in back wages
paid to over 7,400 employees.
These self-audits yielded more back wages to
employees in less time than traditional compliance
actions.
Section 3. Definitions
Section 3 defines ``affected employee'' as an employee
affected by a violation of a minimum wage or overtime hour
requirement of the FLSA. ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division. ``Employee'' has
the meaning given in FLSA section 3, which is generally any
individual employed by an employer. ``Employer'' has the
meaning given in FLSA section 3, which generally includes any
person acting directly or indirectly in the interest of the
employer. ``Good faith'' means that an employer is not, at the
time such employer submits a PAID program application, under
investigation by DOL or subject to a lawsuit related to a
potential violation. ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
Labor. And ``self-audit'' means an audit conducted by an
employer to resolve inaccuracies regarding the computation of
FLSA wages and overtime.
Section 4. Payroll Audit Independent Determination Program
Section 4 codifies DOL's PAID program and includes the
following provisions:
establishes the PAID program at DOL;
provides application requirements and
resources for compliance assistance under the PAID
program;
establishes the employer application review
process to participate in the PAID program;
sets terms for the employer approval process
and names the criteria under which an application shall
be approved;
sets terms for release of claims of
potential minimum wage and overtime violations;
requires DOL's Wage and Hour Division to
issue a release form to each affected employee and
employer in writing describing the terms of settlement;
specifies that an employee offered a
settlement under the program may accept or decline such
offer;
establishes that the acceptance of such
settlement means an employee waives certain rights
under FLSA section 16 regarding penalties;
requires that employers pay each affected
employee the full amount of unpaid wages or overtime
under the program;
sets forth conditions for denials of
employer applications to participate in the PAID
program;
specifies that DOL may not expand the scope
of violations to be investigated or settled beyond
violations identified by the employer in its
application;
clarifies that DOL may not require any form
of payment by an employer to apply, qualify, or
participate in the program; and
clarifies that information submitted in an
employer application may not be subject to discovery in
federal or state court.
Explanation of Amendments
The amendments, including the amendment in the nature of a
substitute, are explained in the body of this report.
Application of Law to the Legislative Branch
H.R. 2299 establishes the PAID program at DOL including for
eligible employees of the legislative branch under the
Congressional Accountability Act.
Unfunded Mandate Statement
Pursuant to Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-344 (as amended
by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995, Pub. L. No. 104-4), the Committee traditionally adopts as
its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) pursuant to section 402 of
the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
The Committee reports that because this cost estimate was not
timely submitted to the Committee before the filing of this
report, the Committee is not in a position to make a cost
estimate for H.R. 2299.
Earmark Statement
H.R. 2299 does not contain any congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in
clause 9 of House rule XXI.
Roll Call Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee Report to include for
each record vote on a motion to report the measure or matter
and on any amendments offered to the measure or matter the
total number of votes for and against and the names of the
Members voting for and against.
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
In accordance with clause (3)(c) of House of
Representatives rule XIII, the goal of H.R. 2299, the Ensuring
Workers Get PAID Act of 2025, is to establish the Payroll Audit
Independent Determination program at the Department of Labor.
Duplication of Federal Programs
No provision of H.R. 2299 establishes or reauthorizes a
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of
another Federal program, a program that was included in any
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance.
Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the Committee
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
the Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in the body of this report.
Required Committee Hearing
In compliance with clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives the following hearing held
during the 119th Congress was used to develop or consider H.R.
2299: On March 25, 2025, the Subcommittee on Workforce
Protections held a hearing on ``The Future of Wage Laws:
Assessing the FLSA's Effectiveness, Challenges, and
Opportunities.''
New Budget Authority and CBO Cost Estimate
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect
to requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, a cost estimate was not made
available to the Committee in time for the filing of this
report. The Chairman of the Committee shall cause such estimate
to be printed in the Congressional Record upon its receipt by
the Committee.
Committee Cost Estimate
Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison of the
costs that would be incurred in carrying out H.R. 2299.
However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides that this
requirement does not apply when, as with the present report,
the Committee has requested a cost estimate for the bill from
the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is
printed in italics and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938
* * * * * * *
prohibited acts
Sec. 15. (a) After the expiration of one hundred and twenty
days from the date of enactment of this Act, it shall be
unlawful for any person--
(1) to transport, offer for transportation, ship,
deliver, or sell in commerce, or to ship, deliver, or
sell with knowledge that shipment or delivery or sale
thereof in commerce is intended, any goods in the
production of which any employee was employed in
violation of section 6 or section 7, or in violation of
any regulation or order of the Secretary of Labor
issued under section 14; except that no provision of
this Act shall impose any liability upon any common
carrier for the transportation in commerce in the
regular course of its business of any goods not
produced by such common carrier, and no provision of
this Act shall excuse any common carrier from its
obligation to accept any goods for transportation; and
except that any such transportation, offer, shipment,
delivery, or sale of such goods by a purchaser who
acquired them in good faith in reliance on written
assurance from the producer that the goods were
produced in compliance with the requirements of the
Act, and who acquired such goods for value without
notice of any such violation, shall not be deemed
unlawful;
(2) to violate any of the provisions of section 6 or
section 7, or any of the provisions of any regulation
or order of the Secretary issued under section 14;
(3) to discharge or in any other manner discriminate
against any employee because such employee has filed
any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted
any proceeding under or related to this Act, or has
testified or is about to testify in any such
proceeding, or has served or is about to serve on an
industry committee, or has accepted or declined to
accept an offer for settlement under section 4(d) of
the Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2025;
(4) to violate any of the provisions of section 12;
(5) to violate any of the provisions of section 11(c)
or any regulation or order made or continued in effect
under the provisions of section 11(d), or to make any
statement, report, or record filed or kept pursuant to
the provisions of such section or of any regulation or
order thereunder, knowing such statement, report, or
record to be false in a material respect; and
(6) to violate any of the provisions of section 18D.
(b) For the purposes of subsection (a)(1) proof that any
employee was employed in any place of employment where goods
shipped or sold in commerce were produced, within ninety days
prior to the removal of the goods from such place of
employment, shall be prima facie evidence that such employee
was engaged in the production of such goods.
* * * * * * *
MINORITY VIEWS
INTRODUCTION
H.R. 2299, the Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2025, seeks
to codify the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID)
program, which allows employers who self-identify wage theft
violations to report them to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)
and pay back the stolen wages to their workers with no
penalties or interest. This bill risks allowing employers to
steal workers' wages and then use those wages as an interest
free loan until they decide to pay their workers back. Congress
should not be in the business of incentivizing the theft of
workers' wages and should instead be focused on protecting
workers and holding lawbreaking employers accountable.
H.R. 2299 is opposed by the AFL-CIO, the Laborers'
International Union of North America (LIUNA), the United
Steelworkers (USW), the Center for Law and Social Policy, and
the Economic Policy Institute.
BACKGROUND
Wage theft, which is the failure to pay workers the full
amount of wages for which they are legally entitled, is a
multi-billion dollar problem. As of 2014, it is estimated that
workers are robbed of more than $50 billion per year from
lawbreaking employers.\1\ Dollar-for-dollar, wage theft is
larger than all forms of property crime combined.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Celine McNicholas et al., Econ Pol'y Inst., Two Billion Dollars
in Stolen Wages were Recovered for Workers in 2015 and 2016--and That's
Just a Drop in the Bucket 3 (2017), https://files.epi.org/pdf/
138995.pdf.
\2\See Jeff Spross, One of the biggest crime waves in America isn't
what you think it is, The Week (Aug. 16, 2016), https://theweek.com/
articles/642568/biggest-crime-waves-america-isnt-what-think.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)\3\ provides DOL's Wage
and Hour Division with two primary enforcement tools for wage
violations: (1) backpay and liquidated damages, and (2) civil
monetary penalties.\4\ Unfortunately, both provisions are
simply inadequate at addressing and deterring wage theft.
Currently, employers found liable for unpaid minimum wages,
tips, and overtime are required to pay workers back the stolen
wages, as well as pay an ``equal amount as liquidated
damages.''\5\ However, under the FLSA, workers are unable to
recover the total amount of stolen wages, and instead are only
entitled to the difference between their actual pay and the
federal minimum wage and an equal amount in damages.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201 et seq.
\4\See 29 U.S.C. Sec. 216(b); 29 U.S.C. Sec. 216(e)(2).
\5\See 29 U.S.C. Sec. 216(b).
\6\See elaws Advisors: Fair Labor Standards Act Advisor, U.S. Dep't
of Lab., https://webapps.dol.gov/elaws/whd/flsa/screen6.asp (last
visited Oct. 27, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On top of backpay and damages, the Wage and Hour Division
can impose civil monetary penalties on law-breaking employers
to serve as an additional disincentive. However, the current
penalty levels are far too low to be a meaningful deterrent. In
fact, meager penalties for wage theft remain a decades-old
problem. In 1981, the General Accounting Office concluded that
``many employers appear to have willfully violated the [FLSA]
and that current enforcement actions have not resulted in
penalties that would deter these violations.''\7\ Today, the
inflation-adjusted ceiling on civil monetary penalties is just
$2,515 for repeated or willful minimum wage and overtime
violations.\8\ Even though Congress amended the FLSA in 2018 to
include protections against tip theft and authorize a civil
monetary penalty equivalent to minimum wage and overtime
violations,\9\ the maximum penalty, accounting for inflation,
for stealing workers' tips is only $1,409.\10\ According to
Jenn Round, a fellow at the Center for Innovation in Worker
Organization at Rutgers University, ``some companies are doing
a cost-benefit analysis and realize it's cheaper to violate the
law, even if you get caught.''\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\U.S. Gen'l Accounting Off., GAO-18276, Changes Needed To Deter
Violations Of Fair Labor Standards Act iii (1981) (accessible at
https://www.gao.gov/assets/hrd-81-60.pdf).
\8\See 29 C.F.R. Sec. 578.3(a)(2).
\9\Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-141
Sec. 1201 (2018).
\10\See 29 C.F.R. Sec. 578.3(a)(1); See also 29 U.S.C.
Sec. 203(m)(2)(B).
\11\U.S. Companies are Stealing Pay from Low-Wage Workers, Report
Says, CBS News (May 4, 2021), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wage-theft-
us-companies-workers/ (quoting Jenn Round, Fellow at Center for
Innovation in Worker Organization at Rutgers University).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rather than finding ways to improve enforcement and more
effectively deter lawbreaking employers from stealing from
workers, Republican policy has focused on conciliation instead
of deterrence. In 2018, during the first Trump Administration,
DOL launched the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID)
program, a pilot program that allowed employers to conduct an
internal audit to self-report minimum wage and overtime
violations.\12\ DOL then assessed the amount owed to employees,
and employers were required to pay only that amount. Employers
meeting the PAID program's conditions of making a ``good
faith'' effort to comply with the law were then not subject to
civil monetary penalties or liquidated damages (double damages)
under the FLSA or additional investigation by DOL on identified
violations. Any employee who accepted back wages through the
PAID program had to waive his or her right to sue the employer
for those claims.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\U.S. Department of Labor, ``U.S. Department of Labor Announces
New Program to Expedite Payment to American Workers'' (Mar. 6, 2018),
https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/whd/whd20180306.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In early 2021, the Biden Administration suspended the PAID
program, with then-Acting Wage and Hour Division Administrator
Jessica Looman sharing in a statement that ``[t]he Payroll
Audit Independent Determination program deprived workers of
their rights and put employers that play by the rules at a
disadvantage. The U.S. Department of Labor will rigorously
enforce the law, and we will use all the enforcement tools we
have available.''\13\ However, shortly after President Trump
assumed office in 2025, the Trump Administration reinstated the
PAID program.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\U.S. Department of Labor, ``U.S. Department of Labor Ends
Program That Allowed Employers to Self-Report Minimum Age and Overtime
Violations'' (Jan. 29, 2021), https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/
whd/whd20210129.
\14\U.S. Department of Labor, ``U.S. Department of Labor Launches
Self-Audit Programs to Help Regulated Community Strengthen Compliance
with Federal Labor Laws'' (July 24, 2025), https://www.dol.gov/
newsroom/releases/osec/osec202507249.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since 2021, Republican lawmakers have been introducing a
version of H.R. 2299, which codifies into law a process under
the FLSA for employers to self-audit and pay back stolen wages
to workers penalty-free, similar to the Trump Administration's
PAID program. The legislation was first introduced in response
to the Biden Administration ending the PAID program.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\See Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2021, H.R. 5743, 117th
Cong. (2021); Ensuring Workers Get PAID Act of 2023, H.R. 572, 118th
Cong. (2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSSION
This bill provides what is essentially an interest-free
loan for employers via theft of their workers' wages. The PAID
program represents a capitulation on wage theft enforcement and
relies on the supposed good faith of employers who fail to pay
their workers what they are owed.
The remedies and penalties provided under the FLSA serve
two purposes: to adequately compensate workers for the harm of
going without their rightfully owed pay and punishing
lawbreaking employers who fail to comply with federal law. The
cost of committing wage violations is intended to both
encourage employers to proactively and effectively comply with
federal labor laws and pay workers what they are owed and deter
bad actors from stealing workers' wages in the first place.
However, as discussed above, to effectively protect workers'
wages and deter employers from breaking the law, we need to
strengthen our wage and hour laws by increasing penalties for
employers and providing more resources for meaningful
enforcement.
The PAID program completely contradicts the foundational
purpose of the FLSA through its creation of a cost-saving safe
harbor for employers who have broken the law. The bar that
lawbreaking employers must clear to qualify for PAID program
settlements is startlingly low, with only the most egregious
violators barred from participation. Simply put, if the
employer is not a repeat offender, actively being investigated
by DOL, or in legal proceedings related to the unpaid wages,
they can steal a worker's wages and then repay them, interest
free, with no other consequences.
The PAID program would also preempt state and local labor
enforcement agencies from bringing enforcement actions of their
own against lawbreaking employers. Under the PAID program, once
an employer's settlement is approved, all claims to unpaid
minimum wage and overtime are waived, and no action can be
taken against the employer afterward. In many states, state
wage and hour laws are stronger and more protective than the
standards provided by the FLSA. Savvy law-breaking employers
can seek out a settlement with DOL and block state and local
enforcement agencies from investigating and enforcing workers'
potentially stronger wage and overtime claims. Eleven state
attorneys general raised these issues in 2018 when the PAID
program was first implemented, and those same issues persist in
H.R. 2299.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\Eric Schneiderman, et al., Letter to Secretary of Labor Acosta
Regarding the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) Program
(Apr. 11, 2018), https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/
program_multistate_letter_to_acosta.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, in addition to these fundamental flaws, when the
PAID program was previously implemented in the first Trump
Administration, it was ineffective at meaningfully recovering
wages for workers and deterring wage theft. According to a
Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, between April
2018 and September 2019, only 74 employers participated in the
program and DOL only recovered about $4 million in back wages
for 7,429 workers.\17\ Comparatively, in FY 2023, WHD completed
over 20,000 enforcement actions, recovering over $210 million
in back wages for 163,768 workers and an additional over $25
million in civil monetary penalties.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\U.S. Gen'l Accounting Off., Fair Labor Standards Act: Tracking
Additional Complaint Data Could Improve DOL's Enforcement, GAO-18276 16
(2020), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-13.pdf.
\18\U.S. Department of Labor, ``Fiscal Year Data for WHD'' (2024),
https://web.archive.org/web/20241107153930/https://www.dol.gov/
agencies/whd/data/charts/fair-labor-standards-act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress should be strengthening laws protecting workers'
wages and holding employers accountable, not offering them a
path to avoid liability.
DEMOCRATIC AMENDMENTS OFFERED DURING THE MARKUP OF
H.R. 2299
Committee Democrats proffered an amendment to improve the
bill that would have replaced the text of the bill with Rep.
DeLauro (D-CT) and Ranking Member Scott's (D-VA) bill, the Wage
Theft Prevention and Wage Recovery Act, which was last
introduced in the 118th Congress.\19\ The amendment provided a
variety of stronger protections for workers and penalties for
lawbreaking employers, including more robust penalties for wage
theft violations by lawbreaking employers, a guarantee that
workers receive regular pay statements, and ensuring that
workers can collect increased damages for the harms caused to
them by wage theft. Committee Republicans rejected the
amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\Wage Theft Prevention and Wage Recovery Act, H.R. 5402, 118th
Cong. (2023).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment Offered By Description Action Taken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#2................................... Ms. Omar............... Replaces the text of Defeated.
the bill with the Wage
Theft Prevention and
Recovery Act.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, Committee Democrats
unanimously opposed H.R. 2299 when the Committee on Education
and Workforce considered it on November 20, 2025. We urge the
House of Representatives to do the same.
Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
Ranking Member.
Mark DeSaulnier,
Jahana Hayes,
Summer L. Lee,
John Mannion,
Members of Congress.
[all]