Update (October 8, 2026): We corrected three points in this article. The Labor Department's Technical Release 2026-02 is dated June 17, 2026, not the week of July 6. The release requires participation to be "completely voluntary" and the employer not to "receive any payment or compensation in connection with a Trump account" – an earlier version instead listed no automatic enrollment and the employer generally receiving nothing of value, which the release does not state. And per IRS Notice 2025-68 and the Form 4547 instructions, employer contributions count toward the $5,000 annual limit rather than on top of it, and the $2,500 Section 128 cap limits what an employee may exclude from income, not what an employer may contribute.
Employers weighing whether to contribute to their workers' children's Trump Accounts (530A) got a piece of the puzzle: the U.S. Department of Labor says those contributions generally do not have to follow the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), the federal law that governs traditional pension and 401(k) plans. The Department's Employee Benefits Security Administration made the case in Technical Release 2026-02, dated June 17, 2026, and Treasury referenced the guidance July 6 in a release marking the accounts' launch-week bell-ringing ceremony.
What the guidance actually says
ERISA applies to "employee pension benefit plans" – arrangements that exist to provide employees with retirement income. The Labor Department's position is that a Trump Account, and the broader employer programs built around them (which the guidance calls Trump Account Contribution Programs, or TACPs), generally do not meet that definition. That's true even when an employer funds the contribution under Internal Revenue Code Section 128, the provision that lets employers make Trump Account contributions on an employee's behalf, including through salary reduction.
The reasoning turns on who the account is for. Most Trump Account beneficiaries are the employee's dependent children, not the employee – and ERISA's pension-plan definition is written around benefits paid to employees. A benefit for an employee's child, the Department says, falls outside that definition regardless of the funding source.
There's a narrower situation the guidance addresses separately: a 16- or 17-year-old who is both an employee and the beneficiary of their own Trump Account. For that case, the Department says ERISA still will not apply, but only if the program meets every condition below:
Participation is "completely voluntary" for employees;
The employer does not impose conditions on the account beyond those in the tax code;
The employer does not make or influence the account's investment decisions;
The employer does not represent the program as an ERISA plan; and
The employer does not "receive any payment or compensation in connection with a Trump account."
The dollar limit that comes with it
The guidance also reiterates a cap that already exists in the tax code: per Notice 2025-68, up to $2,500 per employee per year of employer contributions to a Trump Account under Section 128 – whether made directly or through salary reduction – may be excluded from the employee's income. That is a cap on what is excluded, not a ceiling on what an employer may contribute, and anything above it is ordinary taxable wages. That figure is scheduled for cost-of-living adjustments for taxable years beginning after 2027 – the first adjusted year is 2028. It does not add room on top of the account's limit: per IRS Notice 2025-68 and the Form 4547 instructions, employer contributions count toward the $5,000 annual limit that applies to a Trump Account from all sources combined. In the instructions' words, "the total of all other contributions (including section 128 employer contributions) during the growth period are subject to an annual limit of $5,000 (subject to cost-of-living adjustments after 2027)."
Why this matters for employers deciding whether to participate
Before this guidance, an employer considering a Trump Account match faced a real open question: would setting one up saddle the company with the same fiduciary duties, nondiscrimination testing, and Form 5500 reporting that come with running a retirement plan under ERISA? For a company weighing whether a match is worth the administrative lift, that uncertainty was a legitimate reason to wait.
Our reporting on this week's wave of employer matches – covering SAP, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and others – noted that "Treasury's detailed guidance for employer contributions is still pending as of this writing, and some companies may hold their final program design until it lands." The Labor Department's release addresses a different piece of that uncertainty than a Treasury contribution-mechanics rule would, but it removes a specific and substantial cost of entry: employers can generally set up a Trump Account contribution program as an ordinary payroll matter, not as an ERISA-covered benefit plan, as long as they don't try to make it look or function like one.
What this does not change
The guidance is about how employer contribution programs are regulated, not about what a family receives. It doesn't create new employer commitments, and it doesn't change the $1,000 federal seed for children born between January 1, 2025 and December 31, 2028, or the $5,000-a-year cap on total contributions to an account. Parents and employees don't need to do anything differently because of this guidance – the practical effect is on the employer side, in whether and how a company chooses to set up a program.
Families who want to see which employers, states, and nonprofits are already contributing can check our Match & Bonus Finder.