Bill · H.R. 4424· House(119-HR-4424)
SHIELD Act
- Introduced
- 7/16/2025
- Last activity
- 7/16/2025 — Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- Sponsored by
- Rudy Yakym
- Cosponsors
- - 14 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "Securing Help for Involuntary Employment Loss and Displacement Act" or the "SHIELD Act," aims to amend existing laws regarding unemployment eligibility. It specifically targets changes to title III of the Social Security Act and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act. The primary goal is to clarify requirements when someone is unemployed due to a labor dispute. It seeks to prevent individuals from receiving regular compensation if they are involved in a strike or other labor dispute, provided it is not a lockout. These changes are scheduled to take effect two years after the Act is enacted.
Yes· 3 of 4
Would business owners be better off under this?+3
Business owners may benefit from reduced unemployment liabilities during labor disputes.
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?+1
Restricting unemployment payments may lead to slight reductions in federal outlays.
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?+1
By limiting eligibility for regular compensation, the bill reduces government outlays for unemployment benefits.
The opposite· 3 of 8
Would union members be better off under this?-7
The bill specifically targets and penalizes union members participating in labor disputes by removing their unemployment benefits.
Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise?-6
The bill negatively impacts union members by stripping them of unemployment benefits during labor disputes.
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?-5
The loss of unemployment benefits during labor disputes will disproportionately impact low-income households.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Clarification of eligibility requirements: The bill amends the Social Security Act to establish a specific condition for regular compensation (Section 2(a)). This provides a clear rule that individuals participating in, providing financial support to, or having a direct interest in a strike or labor dispute (other than a lockout) would not be eligible for regular compensation.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Loss of unemployment compensation: Individuals who are unemployed due to a strike or other labor dispute—including those participating in, supporting, or having a direct interest in the dispute—would be ineligible for regular compensation (Section 2(a)).
- Repeal of existing tax code provisions: The bill repeals paragraph (5) of section 3304(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (Section 2(b)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Business Owners+3Good For Union Workers-7Good For Low Income Households-5Good For Middle Class Households-2
- Economy And Finance
- Reduces Government Spending+1Reduces National Debt+1Improves Union Protections-6Increases Unemployment Benefits-5
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Poverty Reduction-3Improves Social Security-3
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power+1Increase States Rights-1
- 12/9/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/14/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/3/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/11/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/8/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/16/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- 8 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Cliff BentzRepublican · Oregon
Aaron BeanRepublican · Florida
Jeff CrankRepublican · Colorado
Mike KellyRepublican · Pennsylvania
Gregory MurphyRepublican · North Carolina
Blake MooreRepublican · Utah
Nathaniel MoranRepublican · Texas
Scott PerryRepublican · Pennsylvania
Gary PalmerRepublican · Alabama
David RouzerRepublican · North Carolina
Lloyd SmuckerRepublican · Pennsylvania
Keith SelfRepublican · Texas
Claudia TenneyRepublican · New York
Beth Van DuyneRepublican · Texas