H.R. 30

Save American Workers (SAW) Act of 2015

Rep. Todd Young

Ways and Means

January 8, 2015 (114th Congress, 1st Session)

Staff Contact
David Smentek

Floor Situation

On Thursday, January 8, 2015, the House will consider H.R. 30, the Save American Workers (SAW) Act, under a closed rule.  H.R. 30 was introduced on January 6, 2015 by Representative Todd Young (R-IN) and referred to the Committees on Ways and Means and Budget.  The bill has 147 cosponsors.

Bill Summary

H.R. 30 is identical to the text of H.R. 2575, the Save American Workers Act, which passed on April 3, 2014 by a vote of 248-179 (See Roll Call #156) with unanimous Republican support.

H.R. 30 repeals the 30-hour definition of full time employee in the Affordable Care Act for purposes of the employer mandate and replaces it with a 40-hour definition for full time employee.  “Under the proposal, full time employee means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 40 hours of service per week. In addition, the number of full-time equivalent employees for a month is determined by dividing the aggregate number of hours of service of employees who are not full-time employees for the month by 174 (rather than 120 as under present law).”[1]

[1] See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT 113hrpt386/pdf/CRPT-113hrpt386.pdf, p.7.


Obamacare subjects large employers, defined as those who employ more than 50 full-time equivalents, to a tax penalty if they do not offer affordable health care coverage or one or more of its full-time employee(s) is certified as receiving a premium subsidy for health care[2].  A full time employee is defined under Obamacare as an employee who works an average of at least 30 hours per week.  For those employers that do not offer health care coverage, the tax penalty is $2,000 multiplied by the total number of full time employees.  For purposes of calculating the number of employees, the first 30 employees are exempted.  With respect to those employers who offer minimum essential benefit health care coverage to employees and at least one employee receives a premium subsidy because the employer’s offer is not “affordable” to the employee, that employer may be subject to a tax penalty of $3,000 multiplied by the number of employees who receive premium subsidies capped at the total amount had the employer not offered health insurance coverage at all.[3]

On July 2, 2013, the Administration first delayed the employer mandate for one year until January 1, 2015. The Administration again delayed the employer mandate on February 10, 2014.  This time, the mandate for employers with 50-99 employees was delayed until January 1, 2016.  However, for those employers with more than 100 employees, at least 70 percent of the employees must be covered in 2015, and 95 percent must be covered in 2016.

[2] See id, p.5.
[3] See id.


According to CBO and JCT estimates, enacting H.R. 30 would “increase budget deficits by $18.1 billion over the 2015-2020 period and by $53.2 billion over the 2015-2025 period.”[4]  The 10-year estimate is the net of $66.4 billion in additional on-budget costs and $13.2 billion in off-budget savings.[5]

[4] https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/hr30.pdf, at 2.
[5] See Id. at 2.

Additional Information

For questions or further information contact the GOP Conference at 5-5107.

Additional Views

H.R. 30 – Save American Workers Act of 2015
(Rep. Young, R-Indiana)

The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 30, the Save American Workers Act, because it would significantly increase the deficit, reduce the number of Americans with employer-based health insurance coverage, and create incentives for employers to shift their employees to part-time work – causing the problem it intends to solve.  Rather than attempting once again to repeal or undermine the Affordable Care Act, which the House has tried to do over 50 times, it is time for the Congress to stop fighting old political battles and join the President in forwarding an agenda focused on providing greater economic opportunity and security for middle class families and all those working to be a part of the middle class.

This legislation would weaken a provision of the Affordable Care Act designed to maintain employer-based health insurance coverage, protect their employees, and prevent employers’ health‑benefit costs from being shifted to taxpayers.  According to the July estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, it would increase the budget deficit by $45.7 billion over the 2015 to 2024 period, reduce the number of people receiving employer-based health insurance coverage, and increase the number of individuals who are uninsured.  While the Administration appreciates the concerns that result from the current 30-hour definition of full-time work, there is no evidence that this has caused a broad shift to part-time work to date. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, since the Affordable Care Act became law, more than 90 percent of the increase in employment has been in full-time jobs, and over that time, the economy has added 10.8 million private-sector jobs.  Furthermore, by moving the threshold to 40 hours, this legislation could cause the problem it claims to solve by greatly increasing the number of workers for whom employers may have an incentive to reduce hours to avoid the requirement.

The Affordable Care Act gives people greater control over their own health care.  Since 2013, estimates show that about 10 million Americans have gained health coverage.  Nearly 6.5 million have renewed or newly signed up for health insurance coverage through the Federally-facilitated Health Insurance Marketplaces to date, and open enrollment continues through February 15.  Because of the Affordable Care Act, Americans who have previously been denied coverage due to a pre-existing medical condition now have access to coverage.  Additionally, the law allows millions of young Americans to stay on their parents’ plans until age 26, and provides access to free preventive care like cancer screenings that can catch illness early on.  Equally important, the Affordable Care Act has contributed to the slowest growth in the prices of health care goods and services in 50 years.

While the Administration welcomes ideas to improve the law, H.R. 30 would shift costs to taxpayers, put workers’ hours at risk, and disrupt health insurance coverage.

If the President were presented with H.R. 30, he would veto it.