Legislative Update and Watch List
Disclaimer: This legislative update was provided by SCI as a resource for CLDA members. The views and information presented are solely those of the author and do not represent an endorsement or official position of the CLDA or its leadership. This information is provided for educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.
What's Happening Lately
Since the last monitoring report, two bills have seen movement worth flagging. In Alaska, AK SB35 cleared the Senate 17–3 in April and has now advanced through the House Labor and Commerce Committee, which adopted a House committee substitute and referred the bill to Rules as of May 16 — putting it on a credible path to the House floor. In Ohio, OH HB840 was introduced and referred to the House Commerce and Labor Committee on May 13, making it a new entry on the watchlist at an early stage. Looking at the current landscape, AK SB35 is the higher-priority item. The bill codifies an independent contractor safe harbor for delivery network company couriers under Alaska wage, unemployment, and workers' compensation law, explicitly stating that couriers meeting four platform-side conditions "are independent contractors for all purposes." That framing is a meaningful win for the IC model in Alaska. The practical limitation for freight brokers is that the safe harbor applies only to couriers using vehicles under 6,000 pounds operating within a 50-mile radius — a threshold that excludes the CDL-holding owner-operators at the center of your carrier relationships. The bill's direct operational relevance is narrow, but its legislative trajectory and affirming language around IC status are worth supporting as a matter of broader precedent. OH HB840 warrants a different kind of attention. The bill imposes an employee classification on TNC drivers — but only during defined "passenger platform time" or "dispatch platform time" under Ohio's rideshare-specific Chapter 4925 framework, and the motor carrier exclusion in Sec. 4121.01(A)(4)(b) is preserved. Your broker-carrier relationships are not directly touched. The indirect concern is the template risk: a legislative model that treats platform-based dispatch as sufficient to trigger employee status could be cited by regulators or plaintiff attorneys in future freight sector challenges, particularly if the definition of "transportation network company" is ever argued to encompass digital load-matching platforms. Monitor how the bill's language is refined in committee. The overall environment remains one of incremental, sector-specific classification activity rather than sweeping freight-sector reform, but the line between rideshare and freight regulation continues to blur at the margins and warrants ongoing attention.
Stay Ahead of Legislative Risk with SCI
SCI is the premier third-party administrator (3PA) for the logistics industry, delivering contractor onboarding, payment processing, access to insurance products and compliance automation through our AI-powered DocDetection™ platform. With 30+ years serving logistics brokers and freight companies, we help you administer independent contractor relationships with confidence — so you can focus on moving freight, not paperwork.
Executive Summary — Legislative Watch List
Sorted by recent activity, then relevance score. Bills updated within 30 days are prioritized as action items.
Score: 8-10 = high (green) · 5-7 = moderate (amber) · 1-4 = low (red) · ◄ = updated within 30 days (action item) · Bill numbers link to LegiScan · Titles link to detail below
Alaska (AK) — 1 bill
SB35 RECENT ACTIVITY
Last action: May 16, 2026 (2 days ago)
6/10 SCORESUPPORT
Transportation/delivery Network Companies
An Act relating to transportation network companies and delivery network companies; and relating to occupational accident insurance.
Status: H: L&C RPT HCS(L&C) NEW TITLE 3DP 2DNP 1NR 1AM / TITLE CHANGE: HCR 25 / DP: FRIER, FIELDS, HALL / DNP: COULOMBE, SADDLER / NR: CARRICK / AM: D.NELSON / FN2: ZERO(LWF) / FN3: ZERO(CED) / REFERRED TO RULES (May 16, 2026) · S: READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB 35(L&C) / RETURN TO SECOND FOR AM 1 UC / AM NO 1 ADOPTED UC / AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING / PASSED Y17 N3 / TRANSMITTED TO (H) / VERSION: CSSB 35(L&C) AM (Apr 13, 2026)
Assessment: This Alaska bill extends existing transportation network company (TNC) independent contractor protections to delivery network company couriers, explicitly stating that couriers 'are independent contractors for all purposes' under Alaska wage, unemployment, and workers' comp law when the company meets four specific conditions. However, the bill's IC safe harbor is limited to couriers using vehicles under 6,000 lbs within 50 miles — excluding the heavy-vehicle owner-operators who form the core of your broker-carrier relationships. The bill is a net positive for the IC model in Alaska, but its direct operational impact on freight brokers is narrow.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Alaska or working with last-mile delivery platforms should monitor this bill and consider supporting it as a model for IC protections.
Iowa (IA) — 7 bills
Last action: Mar 31, 2026 (48 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
A bill for an act prohibiting the misclassification of employees as independent contractors, providing penalties, and including applicability provisions.
A bill for an act prohibiting the misclassification of employees as independent contractors, providing penalties, and including applicability provisions.
Status: H: Motion to invoke Rule 60 to place on Calendar, yeas 92, nays 0. H.J. 769. / Motion prevailed. H.J. 769. / Placed on calendar. H.J. 769. / Rereferred to Labor and Workforce. H.J. 784. (Mar 31, 2026)
Assessment: This Iowa bill creates a new Chapter 95 establishing civil penalties up to $10,000 per misclassified individual and a Class D felony charge — punishable by up to five years confinement — for willful misclassification of employees as independent contractors. The standard for determining IC status is tied to IRS regulations, which use a multi-factor behavioral and financial control analysis that can be applied broadly against broker-carrier arrangements. Critically, the bill shifts the burden of proof onto you as the employer to demonstrate compliance, meaning your IC arrangements with owner-operators would be presumed unlawful until you prove otherwise.
Recommended action: Engage Iowa legislative contacts to oppose this bill, which imposes felony-level criminal penalties and escalating civil fines on businesses that classify workers as independent contractors.
Last action: Apr 3, 2025 (410 days ago)
8/10 SCORESUPPORT
A bill for an act providing for the regulation of delivery network companies and drivers, making penalties applicable, and including effective date provisions.(Formerly HF 7.)
A bill for an act providing for the regulation of delivery network companies and drivers, making penalties applicable, and including effective date provisions.(Formerly HF 7.)
Status: H: Referred to Commerce. H.J. 895. (Apr 03, 2025)
Assessment: Section 321Q.6 is the critical provision for your business: it declares that delivery network drivers 'shall be considered an independent contractor and shall not be considered an agent or employee' of the company, and limits any control relationship to what is expressly agreed in a written contract. This statutory safe harbor directly protects broker and delivery platform operations in Iowa from misclassification liability under state law. The bill also carves delivery network companies and drivers out of motor carrier definitions under Chapter 325A, reducing regulatory overlap and compliance burden for qualifying last-mile operations.
Recommended action: Brokers and carriers operating last-mile delivery networks in Iowa should actively support this bill, as it explicitly codifies independent contractor status for delivery network drivers and insulates companies from employee misclassification claims.
Last action: Mar 13, 2025 (431 days ago)
8/10 SCORESUPPORT
A bill for an act prohibiting the consideration of the deployment, implementation, or use of a motor carrier safety improvement when determining a person's employment status.(Formerly HSB 169.)
A bill for an act prohibiting the consideration of the deployment, implementation, or use of a motor carrier safety improvement when determining a person's employment status.(Formerly HSB 169.)
Status: H: SF 377 substituted. H.J. 648. / Withdrawn. H.J. 656. (Mar 13, 2025)
Assessment: This Iowa bill creates a statutory safe harbor by prohibiting courts and agencies from using a motor carrier's deployment or requirement of safety improvements — including devices, software, training, or operational practices — as a factor when determining whether a driver is an employee, independent contractor, or jointly employed under any state law. Without this protection, requiring owner-operators to use ELDs, dashcams, or safety programs could be cited as evidence of behavioral control under a misclassification analysis, exposing your business to reclassification liability. This bill eliminates that specific vulnerability across all Iowa employment status determinations.
Recommended action: Brokers and carriers should support this bill and urge its passage, as it directly protects your ability to require safety technology from owner-operators without that requirement being used against you in a misclassification claim.
Last action: Feb 28, 2025 (444 days ago)
8/10 SCORESUPPORT
A bill for an act prohibiting the consideration of the deployment, implementation, or use of a motor carrier safety improvement when determining a person's employment status.(See HF 698.)
A bill for an act prohibiting the consideration of the deployment, implementation, or use of a motor carrier safety improvement when determining a person's employment status.(See HF 698.)
Status: H: Committee report approving bill, renumbered as HF 698. (Feb 28, 2025)
Assessment: This Iowa bill creates a statutory safe harbor specifically for motor carrier safety improvements — devices, software, training, policies, and operational practices — by prohibiting their use as evidence of employment or joint-employer status under any Iowa state law. Without this protection, a carrier requiring an owner-operator to use ELDs, dashcams, or safety programs could be exposed to reclassification claims on the grounds that such requirements indicate control over the worker. By ring-fencing safety compliance from classification determinations, this bill removes a significant litigation risk for your broker-carrier contracting model.
Recommended action: Brokers and carriers should support this bill and engage with Iowa legislators to ensure it passes, as it directly protects IC arrangements from being undermined by safety compliance requirements.
Last action: Feb 12, 2025 (460 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
A bill for an act prohibiting the misclassification of employees as independent contractors, providing penalties, and including applicability provisions.
A bill for an act prohibiting the misclassification of employees as independent contractors, providing penalties, and including applicability provisions.
Status: H: Introduced, referred to Labor and Workforce. H.J. 303. (Feb 12, 2025)
Assessment: This Iowa bill creates a new chapter (95) imposing civil penalties up to $10,000 per misclassified individual and Class D felony charges — up to five years imprisonment — on employers who willfully classify workers as independent contractors rather than employees. Classification is determined under IRS regulations, which apply a behavioral and financial control test that, while more favorable than an ABC test, still places the burden of proof on your business to demonstrate compliance after a department determination. The combination of escalating per-worker penalties, felony exposure, and a reversed burden of proof creates serious legal and operational risk for Iowa-based brokers and carriers contracting with owner-operators.
Recommended action: Engage Iowa legislators and industry associations to oppose this bill, which imposes felony criminal liability and escalating civil penalties on brokers who classify owner-operators as independent contractors.
Last action: Feb 19, 2025 (453 days ago)
7/10 SCORESUPPORT
A bill for an act prohibiting the consideration of the deployment, implementation, or use of a motor carrier safety improvement when determining a person's employment status.(See SF 377.)
A bill for an act prohibiting the consideration of the deployment, implementation, or use of a motor carrier safety improvement when determining a person's employment status.(See SF 377.)
Status: S: Committee report approving bill, renumbered as SF 377. (Feb 19, 2025)
Assessment: This Iowa bill creates an explicit safe harbor by prohibiting any safety-related device, equipment, software, policy, or training mandated by a motor carrier from being used as a factor in employee vs. independent contractor classification determinations under state law. This directly protects your broker-carrier model: when you contractually require owner-operators to use safety technology or follow safety procedures, that compliance cannot be cited as evidence of employment control. Without this protection, plaintiffs' attorneys or state agencies could argue that safety mandates demonstrate the level of behavioral control that triggers reclassification.
Recommended action: Brokers and carriers operating in Iowa should support this bill, as it prevents safety compliance requirements — such as ELDs, dashcams, or training mandates — from being weaponized to reclassify owner-operators as employees.
Last action: Feb 20, 2025 (452 days ago)
6/10 SCORENEUTRAL
A bill for an act providing for the regulation of delivery network companies and drivers, making penalties applicable, and including effective date provisions.(See HF 545.)
A bill for an act providing for the regulation of delivery network companies and drivers, making penalties applicable, and including effective date provisions.(See HF 545.)
Status: H: Committee report approving bill, renumbered as HF 545. (Feb 20, 2025)
Assessment: This bill creates a new Iowa regulatory chapter (321Q) for 'delivery network companies' — app-based platforms connecting customers to drivers using personal, noncommercial vehicles — and explicitly excludes these entities from the definition of 'motor carrier' and 'motor carrier of property' under Chapter 325A. The personal vehicle requirement and noncommercial vehicle definition distinguish this framework from the commercial owner-operator relationships your brokerage depends on, meaning direct operational impact is likely limited. However, the explicit carve-out from Chapter 325A motor carrier definitions is worth tracking to ensure it does not create unintended gaps or regulatory ambiguity affecting your contracted carriers in Iowa.
Recommended action: Monitor this bill to confirm its insurance and classification framework does not extend to or conflict with commercial freight broker-carrier arrangements in Iowa.
Illinois (IL) — 1 bill
Last action: Mar 21, 2025 (423 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
WORK COMP-SOLE PROPRIETORS
Amends the Workers' Compensation Act. Provides that the provisions of the Act shall apply automatically and without election to all employers and all their employees, including, but not limited to, sole proprietors and general contractors and their subcontractors (currently, all employers and all their employees), engaged in any department enterprises or businesses which are declared to be extra hazardous. Removes a provision that the Act shall not be construed to apply to any sole proprietor or partner or member of a limited liability company who elects not to provide and pay compensation for accidental injuries sustained by himself, arising out of and in the course of the employment according to the provisions of the Act. Provides that the definition of "corporate officer" does not include a sole proprietor.
Status: S: Rule 3-9(a) / Re-referred to Assignments (Mar 21, 2025)
Assessment: This Illinois bill removes the existing opt-out right that allows sole proprietors, partners, and LLC members to elect out of workers' compensation coverage, making coverage mandatory for those engaged in extra-hazardous industries — a category that explicitly includes carriage by land and motor vehicle operations under item 3. If your owner-operators are structured as sole proprietors hauling freight, they could be forced into mandatory workers' comp coverage, blurring the financial and operational line between independent contractors and employees. This does not directly impose an ABC test or reclassification standard, but mandating employment-style benefits on sole proprietors increases the risk of downstream reclassification arguments and adds cost friction to your contractor relationships.
Recommended action: Brokers should monitor this bill and oppose it if it advances, as it eliminates the opt-out provision that currently allows sole proprietor owner-operators to decline workers' compensation coverage — potentially increasing compliance costs and reclassification pressure.
Kentucky (KY) — 1 bill
Last action: Jan 29, 2026 (109 days ago)
9/10 SCOREOPPOSE
AN ACT relating to misclassification of employees.
Create a new section of KRS Chapter 337 to provide a remedy for employees misclassified as independent contractors; amend KRS 337.010 to define "independent contractor" and "misclassified"; repeal KRS 336.137, relating to marketplace contractors.
Status: H: to Economic Development & Workforce Investment (H) (Jan 29, 2026)
Assessment: This bill does two things that directly threaten your business: it codifies a three-prong ABC test as the definition of 'independent contractor' under Kentucky wage law — meaning owner-operators must perform work outside your usual course of business to avoid employee status — and it repeals KRS 336.137, which currently protects marketplace contractor relationships from reclassification as employment. On top of the reclassification risk, the bill creates double-damages liability (full back wages plus an equal amount in liquidated damages), attorney's fees, and a collective action mechanism that could expose your business to class-scale wage claims.
Recommended action: Brokers should actively oppose this bill and engage Kentucky legislators, as it codifies an ABC test for worker classification and repeals existing marketplace contractor protections that currently shield IC arrangements.
Massachusetts (MA) — 6 bills
Last action: Feb 26, 2026 (81 days ago)
9/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Establishing protections and accountability for Delivery Network Company workers, consumers, and communities
For legislation to establish protections and accountability for Delivery Network Company workers, consumers, and communities. Labor and Workforce Development.
Status: H: House concurred (Feb 27, 2025) · S: Bill reported favorably by committee and referred to the committee on Senate Ways and Means (Feb 26, 2026)
Assessment: This bill explicitly presumes all application-based delivery workers are employees under Massachusetts General Laws, consistent with the state's existing ABC test in Section 148B — the most worker-friendly classification standard in the country — eliminating any IC presumption for last-mile and platform-dispatched delivery arrangements. It imposes mandatory minimum wage floors (up to 150% of basic minimum wage for assigned time), IRS-rate mileage reimbursement at 150% during assigned time, $1M/$3M liability insurance requirements, anti-retaliation provisions with treble damages, and gives the Attorney General broad audit and enforcement authority over payroll data. If your business dispatches delivery workers through any digital platform in Massachusetts, this bill would force reclassification and expose you to significant wage, benefits, and penalty liability.
Recommended action: Logistics brokers and carriers operating app-based delivery networks in Massachusetts should actively oppose this bill and engage state legislators to prevent its passage.
Last action: Mar 26, 2026 (53 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
To prevent wage theft, promote employer accountability, and enhance public enforcement
Relative to wage theft, employer accountability, and public enforcement. Labor and Workforce Development.
Status: H: Bill reported favorably by committee and referred to the committee on House Ways and Means (Mar 26, 2026) · S: Senate concurred (Feb 27, 2025)
Assessment: This bill creates joint and several liability between 'lead contractors' and downstream 'labor contractors' and 'labor subcontractors' for wage theft violations — a structure that could classify logistics brokers as lead contractors liable for pay practices of the owner-operators and carriers they engage. On top of that exposure, the bill grants the Massachusetts AG new stop-work order authority that could halt your business operations upon a finding of wage theft, even before an appeal is resolved. The combination of automatic upstream liability and stop-work power tied to how your contracted carriers pay their workers directly threatens the broker-carrier independent contractor model in Massachusetts.
Recommended action: Brokers should engage Massachusetts legislators to oppose or seek carve-outs from the joint-and-several liability and stop-work order provisions that could expose your brokerage for wage violations committed by contracted carriers.
Last action: Feb 2, 2026 (105 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Establishing protections and accountability for DNC workers, consumers, and communities
Relative to protections and accountability for transportation network and delivery network companies workers, consumers, and communities. Financial Services.
Status: H: Bill reported favorably by committee and referred to the committee on House Ways and Means (Feb 02, 2026) · S: Senate concurred (Feb 27, 2025)
Assessment: This bill explicitly presumes application-based delivery workers are employees under Massachusetts General Laws (c. 149 § 148B), directly triggering the state's ABC test and eliminating the independent contractor classification for delivery network couriers. It also imposes minimum wage obligations for all working time, mandatory mileage reimbursement, anti-retaliation protections, and payroll data reporting requirements enforceable by the Attorney General — creating significant compliance exposure for any company dispatching workers through a digital platform. While currently targeting delivery network companies, the employee-presumption mechanism and enforcement framework set a precedent that could be extended to freight brokerage and owner-operator dispatch arrangements in Massachusetts.
Recommended action: Brokers operating delivery network arrangements in Massachusetts should oppose this bill and engage legislators to prevent the employee-presumption standard from expanding to freight and carrier relationships.
Last action: Dec 18, 2025 (151 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Consolidating multiple definitions of employee to prevent misclassification
For legislation to consolidate multiple definitions of employee. Labor and Workforce Development.
Status: H: House concurred (Feb 27, 2025) · S: Bill reported favorably by committee and referred to the committee on Senate Ways and Means (Dec 18, 2025)
Assessment: This bill extends Massachusetts' existing ABC test under Chapter 149 §148B — one of the strictest independent contractor classification standards in the country — into the workers' compensation statute (Chapter 152), meaning the same three-prong ABC test that already governs wage and hour determinations would now also control whether your owner-operators qualify as employees for workers' comp purposes. Currently, workers' comp uses a separate, less restrictive definition of employee, so this change closes that gap and creates a unified, harder-to-satisfy standard across both regimes. If your carrier relationships fail any prong of the ABC test, you could face workers' comp liability and reclassification exposure under two statutes simultaneously.
Recommended action: Brokers should engage with Massachusetts legislators and industry associations to oppose this bill before it advances through the Labor and Workforce Development committee.
Last action: Dec 18, 2025 (151 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Preventing wage theft, promoting employer accountability, and enhancing public enforcement
For legislation to prevent wage theft, promote employer accountability, and enhance public enforcement. Labor and Workforce Development.
Status: H: House concurred (Feb 27, 2025) · S: Bill reported favorably by committee and referred to the committee on Senate Ways and Means (Dec 18, 2025)
Assessment: This bill creates joint-and-several liability between 'lead contractors' and downstream 'labor contractors' and 'labor subcontractors' for wage theft violations — a structure that could sweep in logistics brokers who arrange freight through independent carriers and owner-operators. It also grants the Massachusetts Attorney General stop-work order authority that can halt all business operations at a specific location upon a finding of wage theft or failure to obtain unemployment insurance, with treble damages available in civil enforcement actions. If your carrier relationships are characterized as a lead contractor/labor contractor arrangement under Massachusetts law, you could face liability for wage violations you neither committed nor controlled.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Massachusetts should engage opposition to this bill, as its joint-and-several liability structure and stop-work order authority could directly expose your business for wage violations committed by carriers or owner-operators in your supply chain.
Last action: Dec 11, 2025 (158 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Relative to wage theft and due process
For legislation relative to wage theft and due process. Labor and Workforce Development.
Status: H: House concurred (Feb 27, 2025) · S: Accompanied a study order, see S2843 (Dec 11, 2025)
Assessment: This bill creates stop-work order authority for the Massachusetts AG and the Department of Unemployment Assistance targeting any employer found in violation of wage theft statutes — critically, Section 148B (Massachusetts' ABC test for worker classification) is explicitly included in the definition of 'wage theft,' meaning a misclassification finding against your business could trigger an order halting all operations at a specific location. The bill also establishes a new group civil action mechanism allowing any three current or former workers to sue for wage theft, again covering ABC test violations, and imposes penalties up to $25,000 per violation. If your company contracts with owner-operators in Massachusetts and faces a classification challenge, these new enforcement tools — stop-work orders and coordinated civil suits — significantly raise the operational and financial stakes.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Massachusetts should monitor this bill and engage with industry associations to oppose the stop-work order provisions and expanded civil action mechanisms that could be triggered under Massachusetts' existing ABC test (Section 148B).
Maryland (MD) — 4 bills
Last action: Apr 13, 2026 (35 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Fraud Prevention, Prevailing Wage, and Living Wage - Prohibitions, Penalties, and Enforcement
Prohibiting a person from knowingly making or using, or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement resulting in underpayments of unemployment insurance contributions or payment of unemployment insurance benefits of more than $15,000 in a calendar year; altering the enforcement mechanisms related to workplace fraud laws, living wage laws, and prevailing wage laws, including authorizing the Attorney General to investigate and bring suit in a certain manner; etc.
Status: S: Favorable with Amendments Report by Finance / Favorable with Amendments {943726/1 / Motion Laid Over (Senator Jennings) Adopted (Apr 13, 2026)
Assessment: This bill strengthens Maryland's workplace fraud enforcement by increasing civil penalties for misclassification up to $10,000 per worker (with triple damages available), authorizing the Attorney General to independently investigate and sue, and — critically — establishing joint-and-several liability for general contractors when subcontractors misclassify workers, regardless of direct contractual relationship. While the joint liability provision is framed around construction, the broader misclassification penalty enhancements and expanded AG enforcement authority under the workplace fraud statutes apply to any employer relationship and could be used against brokers who arrange freight through owner-operators. The combination of higher penalties, AG enforcement, and mandatory license revocation for repeat violations raises the compliance stakes materially for your operations in Maryland.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Maryland with subcontractor relationships should monitor this bill and engage with the Maryland General Assembly to oppose provisions that expand joint-and-several liability and increase misclassification penalties.
Last action: Apr 13, 2026 (35 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Fraud Prevention, Prevailing Wage, and Living Wage - Prohibitions, Penalties, and Enforcement
Prohibiting a person from knowingly making or using, or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement resulting in underpayments of unemployment insurance contributions or payment of unemployment insurance benefits of more than $15,000 in a calendar year; altering the enforcement mechanisms related to workplace fraud laws, living wage laws, and prevailing wage laws, including authorizing the Attorney General to investigate and bring suit in a certain manner; etc.
Status: H: Third Reading Passed (98-36) (Apr 06, 2026) · S: Rereferred to Finance / Favorable with Amendments Report by Finance / Favorable with Amendments {133121/1 / Motion Special Order until Later Today (Senator Ready) Rejected / Committee Amendment {133121/1 Adopted / Favorable with Amendments Adopted / Second Reading Passed with Amendments (Apr 13, 2026)
Assessment: This bill strengthens Maryland's workplace fraud enforcement by introducing joint-and-several liability for general contractors — and by extension those in contractual chains — for misclassification violations committed by subcontractors, which could expose logistics brokers who arrange freight through owner-operators to liability for downstream classification decisions they do not control. Civil penalties for misclassification increase, with one-third payable directly to affected workers, and the Attorney General gains expanded authority to investigate and litigate workplace fraud, prevailing wage, and living wage violations. While the bill targets construction-adjacent prevailing wage scenarios, the workplace fraud provisions in Title 3, Subtitle 9 apply broadly enough to create real compliance exposure for your broker-carrier independent contractor arrangements in Maryland.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Maryland should monitor this bill closely and engage with industry associations to oppose provisions that expand joint-and-several liability for worker misclassification and increase civil penalties for contractor classification violations.
Last action: Jan 19, 2026 (119 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Recipients of Economic Development Assistance or State Contracts - Certification of Compliance With State Labor Laws
Requiring certain persons that receive certain State economic development assistance to make a certification each year that the person was not the subject of a certain final adverse determination and is not currently failing to comply with certain outstanding requirements under a prior final judgment or order; requiring a certain unit of State government to initiate a pause on disbursements or approvals of certain economic development assistance or the award or renewal of certain State contracts; etc.
Status: H: Hearing 2/17 at 1:00 p.m. (Jan 19, 2026)
Assessment: This bill requires covered recipients — including any company holding $250,000 or more in aggregate Maryland state procurement contracts — to annually certify they have not received a final adverse determination for violations of state labor obligations, which explicitly include misclassification under Title 3 of the Labor and Employment Article. If a broker is found to have misclassified owner-operators under Maryland law, that determination could block new contract awards, renewals, and economic development disbursements until corrective actions and a 12-month waiting period are satisfied. The carve-out for determinations under $5,000 with no willfulness or misclassification finding provides limited protection, but the bill's direct enumeration of misclassification as a trigger makes it a meaningful compliance risk for broker operations tied to Maryland state contracts.
Recommended action: Brokers holding $250,000 or more in Maryland state contracts should engage against this bill, as a misclassification finding could trigger a pause on new contract awards and renewals.
Last action: Feb 3, 2026 (104 days ago)
6/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Maryland Department of Labor - Investigation of Complaints - Requirements (Worksite Enforcement Act of 2026)
Requiring the Maryland Department of Labor to establish certain procedures for receiving, reviewing, and investigating certain complaints regarding matters under the jurisdiction of the Department; requiring the Department to employ one investigators for each of five regions of the State to investigate complaints; and requiring, beginning fiscal year 2027, the Governor to include in the annual budget bill an appropriation of $500,000 for the hiring of five investigators.
Status: H: Hearing 2/12 at 2:00 p.m. (Feb 03, 2026)
Assessment: This bill creates a dedicated statewide investigative infrastructure at the Maryland Department of Labor, explicitly empowering five regional investigators to pursue complaints involving worker misclassification and to request payroll records and worker classification documentation during preliminary fact-finding. The 14-day response requirement for misclassification complaints signals that these will be treated as a priority enforcement category, increasing the likelihood that your owner-operator arrangements face scrutiny. The referral pipeline to the Attorney General's Division of Consumer Protection adds a second enforcement layer, meaning a single complaint against your business could trigger parallel investigations.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Maryland should monitor this bill and engage with the Governor's office and the Maryland Department of Labor to ensure that worker misclassification investigations are scoped narrowly and do not target legitimate owner-operator arrangements.
Michigan (MI) — 2 bills
Last action: Sep 24, 2025 (236 days ago)
9/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Employment security: administration; determination of whether services performed by an individual are employment; modify. Amends sec. 42 of of 1936 (Ex Sess) PA 1 (MCL 421.42).
Employment security: administration; determination of whether services performed by an individual are employment; modify. Amends sec. 42 of of 1936 (Ex Sess) PA 1 (MCL 421.42).
Status: H: Bill Electronically Reproduced 09/18/2025 (Sep 24, 2025)
Assessment: Beginning January 1, 2026, this bill replaces Michigan's current IRS 20-factor control test with a three-prong ABC test for unemployment insurance purposes — requiring that your owner-operators be free from your control, perform work outside your usual course of business, AND be customarily engaged in an independent trade to retain IC status. All three prongs must be satisfied or the worker is automatically classified as an employee, meaning your contracted owner-operators could be reclassified as employees subject to UI contributions if any single prong fails. This directly threatens the broker-carrier model by exposing your business to UI tax liability on freight carriers you currently engage as independent contractors.
Recommended action: Brokers should actively oppose this bill and engage Michigan legislators, as it would impose an ABC test on all worker classification determinations under Michigan's unemployment insurance law starting January 1, 2026.
Last action: Apr 17, 2025 (396 days ago)
9/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Labor: hours and wages; penalties and remedies for misclassification of independent contractors; provide for. Amends secs. 1, 13, 15, 18 & 19 of 1978 PA 390 (MCL 408.471 et seq.) & adds secs. 13c & 13d.
Labor: hours and wages; penalties and remedies for misclassification of independent contractors; provide for. Amends secs. 1, 13, 15, 18 & 19 of 1978 PA 390 (MCL 408.471 et seq.) & adds secs. 13c & 13d.
Status: H: Bill Electronically Reproduced 04/16/2025 (Apr 17, 2025)
Assessment: This Michigan bill codifies a three-prong ABC test as the exclusive definition of 'independent contractor' — requiring that the worker be free from control, perform work outside the payer's usual course of business, and be customarily engaged in an independent trade — and creates Section 13c, which prohibits classifying anyone as an IC who does not meet all three prongs, with the burden of proof on the payer. Penalties are severe: civil fines up to $10,000, exemplary damages up to three times unpaid wages, a 100% annual penalty on wages owed, misdemeanor criminal liability, and mandatory payment of estimated federal taxes and Medicare contributions to the affected worker. For logistics brokers, this means your owner-operator contracting relationships in Michigan would be presumed unlawful unless you can affirmatively prove all three ABC prongs — a standard that owner-operators who regularly haul freight in your core lanes will likely fail under prong two.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Michigan should actively oppose this bill and engage with state legislative contacts, as it directly criminalizes and penalizes independent contractor arrangements that are central to your business model.
Minnesota (MN) — 2 bills
Last action: Apr 1, 2025 (412 days ago)
6/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Biennial misclassification fraud impact report requirement and appropriation
Biennial misclassification fraud impact report requirement and appropriation
Status: S: Comm report: To pass as amended and re-refer to Taxes (Apr 01, 2025)
Assessment: This bill funds and mandates annual reporting by Minnesota's Intergovernmental Misclassification Enforcement and Education Partnership, requiring industry-by-industry estimates of misclassification rates explicitly designed to 'guide partnership enforcement priorities' — meaning trucking, where IC use is heavy, could be flagged as a high-priority target. The reporting also quantifies fiscal impacts to unemployment insurance, workers' comp, and income tax — building a public record that frames your owner-operator relationships as revenue losses to the state. While this bill doesn't directly reclassify workers or impose penalties, it seeds the data infrastructure that typically precedes escalated enforcement and ABC-test-style legislation.
Recommended action: Engage with Minnesota legislative labor committees to push back on reporting frameworks that treat independent contractor arrangements as presumptive fraud and that could sharpen enforcement targeting in trucking and logistics.
Last action: Mar 10, 2025 (434 days ago)
6/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Annual reports from partnership entities of the Intergovernmental Misclassification Enforcement and Education Partnership required, and money appropriated.
Annual reports from partnership entities of the Intergovernmental Misclassification Enforcement and Education Partnership required, and money appropriated.
Status: H: Introduction and first reading, referred to Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy (Mar 10, 2025)
Assessment: This bill requires Minnesota's Intergovernmental Misclassification Enforcement and Education Partnership agencies — including Labor and Industry, Revenue, and DEED — to produce annual misclassification rate estimates by industry, explicitly to 'guide partnership enforcement priorities,' and appropriates funding to support that analysis. While it does not directly impose a new classification test or penalty, it builds the data infrastructure and inter-agency coordination that typically precedes targeted enforcement actions — including against freight and transportation. The industry-specific reporting requirement means owner-operator arrangements in trucking could be flagged as enforcement targets based on estimated misclassification rates.
Recommended action: Brokers should monitor this bill and engage with Minnesota legislators to push back on expanded misclassification enforcement infrastructure being funded and institutionalized across multiple state agencies.
Missouri (MO) — 3 bills
Last action: Feb 11, 2026 (96 days ago)
7/10 SCORESUPPORT
Modifies provisions relating to workers' compensation
Modifies provisions relating to workers' compensation
Status: S: Hearing Conducted S General Laws Committee (Feb 11, 2026)
Assessment: This bill explicitly retains the exclusion in §287.020 providing that owner-operators of motor vehicles leased or contracted to for-hire carriers are not 'employees' under Missouri workers' comp — and §287.043 directs courts to adopt case law (including Owner Operator Independent Drivers Ass'n v. New Prime) that has historically protected that IC classification. The shift from a 'prevailing factor' to a 'substantial factor' causation standard for injury compensability expands the universe of compensable claims for workers who are employees, but does not affect your owner-operator relationships. Your primary concern is the preservation of the owner-operator carve-out, which this bill maintains and strengthens through its case law adoption directive.
Recommended action: Brokers should support this bill as it preserves and clarifies the owner-operator exclusion from Missouri workers' compensation coverage, reinforcing the independent contractor status of leased or contracted motor vehicle owner-operators.
Last action: Apr 15, 2026 (33 days ago)
6/10 SCORESUPPORT
Modifies provisions relating to workers' compensation
Modifies provisions relating to workers' compensation
Status: H: Executive Session Completed (H) / Voted Do Pass (H) / Reported Do Pass (H) - AYES: 6 NOES: 2 PRESENT: 0 / Taken Up for Third Reading (H) / Third Read and Passed (H) - AYES: 86 NOES: 62 PRESENT: 1 / Reported to the Senate and First Read (S) (Feb 09, 2026) · S: Executive Session Held (S) / SCS Voted Do Pass (S) (Apr 15, 2026)
Assessment: This bill amends Missouri's workers' compensation statute and retains the existing exclusion in §287.020 that explicitly removes from the definition of 'employee' any owner-operator of a motor vehicle leased or contracted to a for-hire motor carrier — directly protecting your broker-carrier relationships from workers' comp coverage mandates. The bulk of the bill's changes address injury causation standards (the 'prevailing factor' test), occupational disease definitions, and PTSD benefits for first responders, none of which directly alter the owner-operator exclusion your business relies on. Since the IC exclusion language appears preserved rather than expanded, the practical impact on your operations is limited, but you should confirm the final enrolled version keeps that carve-out intact.
Recommended action: Brokers should monitor this bill and consider supporting it, as it preserves and potentially strengthens Missouri's existing workers' compensation exclusion for owner-operators of leased or contracted motor vehicles.
Last action: Jan 27, 2026 (111 days ago)
5/10 SCORENEUTRAL
Modifies provisions relating to workers' compensation
Modifies provisions relating to workers' compensation
Status: S: Second Read and Referred S General Laws Committee (Jan 27, 2026)
Assessment: This bill amends Missouri's workers' compensation statute and explicitly retains language excluding owner-operators of leased or contracted motor vehicles from the definition of 'employee' under Chapter 287 — a provision that directly protects your broker-carrier arrangements. The bill's substantive changes focus on narrowing compensability standards (tightening the 'accident' definition, adding a 'greater benefit of the employer' prong, and restricting the extension of premises doctrine), none of which expand liability to independent contractors. Without a current-law comparison confirming the owner-operator exclusion is unchanged rather than new, brokers should verify the final enrolled language preserves that carve-out intact.
Recommended action: Monitor this bill to confirm whether the owner-operator exclusion language in Section 287.020 is preserved, strengthened, or altered from current Missouri workers' compensation law.
New Jersey (NJ) — 4 bills
Last action: Jan 13, 2026 (125 days ago)
8/10 SCORESUPPORT
Revises factors for determining employment or independent contractor status under certain State labor laws.
Revises factors for determining employment or independent contractor status under certain State labor laws.
Status: S: Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Labor Committee (Jan 13, 2026)
Assessment: This bill amends R.S.43:21-19 — the core definitional section of New Jersey's Unemployment Compensation Law where worker classification standards, including the ABC test, are established — to revise the factors used to determine employee versus independent contractor status. If the revised factors move toward a behavioral-control or common-law standard rather than the strict ABC test, your New Jersey owner-operator relationships would face significantly lower reclassification risk for UI contribution purposes. Monitor the final factor language closely, as the direction of the revision determines whether this is a meaningful win for your business model or a tightening of classification standards.
Recommended action: Engage NJ legislative contacts to confirm the revised classification factors reduce ABC test burdens and protect your owner-operator arrangements under NJ unemployment compensation law.
Declares Department of Labor and Workforce Development new rules concerning employment status test for independent contractors inconsistent with legislative intent.
Declares Department of Labor and Workforce Development new rules concerning employment status test for independent contractors inconsistent with legislative intent.
Status: S: Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Labor Committee (Jan 13, 2026)
Assessment: This resolution challenges NJDOL proposed rules that would have stacked the ABC test against independent contractor status by treating standard business tools (digital apps, liability insurance) as evidence of employer control, declaring drivers' vehicles a 'place of business' to eliminate a key IC safe harbor, and rendering traditional IC indicators like 1099 filing and multi-client work irrelevant. If the proposed rules had taken effect, your broker-carrier arrangements in New Jersey would face a heavily employment-presumed classification environment with far fewer pathways to lawfully use independent owner-operators. Supporting this resolution preserves the current ABC test framework and the operational flexibility your business depends on.
Recommended action: Logistics brokers operating in New Jersey should support this resolution, as it directly blocks proposed NJDOL rules that would have made it significantly harder to classify owner-operators and drivers as independent contractors under the ABC test.
Last action: Feb 5, 2026 (102 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Establishes Office of Labor Law Enforcement.
Establishes Office of Labor Law Enforcement.
Status: S: Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Labor Committee (Feb 05, 2026)
Assessment: This bill creates a dedicated Office of Labor Law Enforcement within NJ's Department of Labor, explicitly charged with coordinating enforcement of misclassification violations across wage and hour laws, unemployment compensation, temporary disability, and workers' compensation — the full stack of statutes that could be used to reclassify your owner-operators as employees. The self-funding mechanism — directing all collected fines and penalties back into enforcement — creates a financial incentive for aggressive audit activity that directly threatens broker-carrier independent contractor arrangements in New Jersey. While the bill does not establish a new classification test, the institutional enforcement infrastructure it builds materially raises your exposure under existing NJ misclassification standards.
Recommended action: Brokers should monitor this bill and engage with NJ legislative contacts to oppose or seek amendments that limit its application to owner-operator and carrier relationships.
Last action: Jan 13, 2026 (125 days ago)
7/10 SCORENEUTRAL
Revises test for employment or independent contractor status under certain State labor laws.
Revises test for employment or independent contractor status under certain State labor laws.
Assessment: This bill directly amends the NJ Unemployment Compensation Law's definition of 'employment' — the statute that determines whether your owner-operators are classified as employees for UI purposes in New Jersey. The bill text is truncated before reaching the revised IC classification test language, so the specific mechanism — whether it adopts a more favorable control-based standard or tightens the ABC-style prongs — cannot be confirmed from what was provided. Given that the test revision directly governs how NJ determines employment status for freight contractors, this warrants immediate attention regardless of direction.
Recommended action: Monitor this bill closely and engage NJ legislative contacts to obtain the complete classification test language before taking a formal position.
New York (NY) — 5 bills
S01514 / A06664
Last action: Mar 30, 2026 (49 days ago)
9/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Empowers the commissioner of labor to issue stop-work orders against employers for misclassification of employees as independent contractors or for providing false, incomplete, or misleading information to an insurance company on the number of employees of such employer.
Empowers the commissioner of labor to issue stop-work orders against employers for misclassification of employees as independent contractors or for providing false, incomplete, or misleading information to an insurance company on the number of employees of such employer.
Status: S: PASSED SENATE / DELIVERED TO ASSEMBLY (Mar 30, 2026)
Assessment: This bill creates a new stop-work order mechanism under New York Labor Law §45, authorizing the commissioner to halt all business operations at every worksite where misclassification is found — meaning a single IC classification dispute could shut down your entire New York operation within 72 hours. Penalties for non-compliance run $1,000–$5,000 per day, stop-work orders survive to successor entities, and employers must continue paying affected workers up to 10 days during the shutdown. The combination of rapid enforcement timelines, successor liability, and mandatory wage continuation during an order creates severe financial and operational exposure for brokers who rely on owner-operator relationships in New York.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in New York should actively oppose this bill and engage state legislators and industry associations to prevent its passage.
S09821 / A04278
Last action: Apr 7, 2026 (41 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Enacts the "Empowering People in Rights Enforcement (EMPIRE) Worker Protection Act"; relates to the delegation of state enforcement authority to private actors; authorizes an affected employee, whistleblower, representative organization or an organizational deputy to initiate a public enforcement action on behalf of the commissioner for certain provisions of the labor law, or any regulation promulgated thereunder.
Enacts the "Empowering People in Rights Enforcement (EMPIRE) Worker Protection Act"; relates to the delegation of state enforcement authority to private actors; authorizes an affected employee, whistleblower, representative organization or an organizational deputy to initiate a public enforcement action on behalf of the commissioner for certain provisions of the labor law, or any regulation promulgated thereunder.
Status: S: REFERRED TO LABOR (Apr 07, 2026)
Assessment: This bill creates a California PAGA-style private attorneys general mechanism under New York Labor Law, allowing affected employees — explicitly including workers 'not classified as an employee but who claims to be an employee' — to sue on the state's behalf for misclassification and wage violations, with mandatory attorney fee-shifting and per-employee, per-pay-period penalties starting at $500. For logistics brokers, this means any owner-operator who disputes their independent contractor status could trigger a private enforcement action without waiting for a state agency, dramatically increasing your litigation exposure. The 40% penalty bounty to the relator and automatic fee recovery create a powerful financial incentive for labor organizations to target broker-carrier relationships at scale.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in New York should monitor this bill and engage lobbyists or industry associations to oppose its passage, as it would expose your business to private enforcement actions brought by employees, labor unions, or deputized organizations claiming misclassification of owner-operators.
S00162 / A07421
Last action: Mar 30, 2026 (49 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Authorizes the commissioner of labor and the workers' compensation board to issue stop-work orders; establishes procedure for the issuance of such orders; establishes penalties for failure to comply with such orders.
Authorizes the commissioner of labor and the workers' compensation board to issue stop-work orders; establishes procedure for the issuance of such orders; establishes penalties for failure to comply with such orders.
Status: S: ADVANCED TO THIRD READING (Mar 30, 2026)
Assessment: This bill grants New York's Commissioner of Labor and the Workers' Compensation Board authority to issue stop-work orders requiring cessation of all business operations at every site where a violation occurs — triggered by wage payment violations exceeding $1,000 or knowing failure to carry workers' compensation coverage. If a carrier you broker with is found in violation, the successor-liability provision means the order follows the business through restructuring, and daily non-compliance penalties of $1,000–$5,000 compound the exposure. While the bill targets employers directly, brokers who are deemed to exercise sufficient control over carrier operations — or who use arrangements that regulators characterize as employment — could find their New York freight operations subject to work stoppages with only 72 hours' notice before the order issues.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in New York should engage with industry associations to oppose this bill, as it creates direct stop-work order exposure for wage and workers' compensation violations that could halt all business operations at every affected site.
S00448 / A04278
Last action: Dec 24, 2025 (145 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Enacts the "Empowering People in Rights Enforcement (EMPIRE) Worker Protection Act"; relates to the delegation of state enforcement authority to private actors; authorizes an affected employee, whistleblower, representative organization or an organizational deputy to initiate a public enforcement action on behalf of the commissioner for certain provisions of the labor law, or any regulation promulgated thereunder.
Enacts the "Empowering People in Rights Enforcement (EMPIRE) Worker Protection Act"; relates to the delegation of state enforcement authority to private actors; authorizes an affected employee, whistleblower, representative organization or an organizational deputy to initiate a public enforcement action on behalf of the commissioner for certain provisions of the labor law, or any regulation promulgated thereunder.
Status: S: AMEND AND RECOMMIT TO LABOR / PRINT NUMBER 448C (Dec 24, 2025)
Assessment: This bill creates a California PAGA-style private attorney general mechanism in New York, allowing workers who claim misclassification — including contractors who allege they should be employees — to sue on behalf of the state and collect civil penalties of $500 per affected worker per pay period per violation, plus mandatory attorney fees. The 'affected employee' definition explicitly includes individuals not classified as employees who claim misclassification, meaning your owner-operators could serve as relators targeting your broker business for alleged Labor Law violations. This dramatically expands enforcement risk beyond state agency capacity by deputizing private plaintiffs and labor organizations to pursue systemic misclassification claims against you with minimal financial barrier to filing.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in New York should monitor this bill closely and engage with industry associations to oppose its passage or advocate for carve-outs protecting legitimate independent contractor arrangements.
Last action: Jan 7, 2026 (131 days ago)
6/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Authorizes certain penalties to be assessed against members of a limited liability company and partners of a limited liability partnership or partnership.
Authorizes certain penalties to be assessed against members of a limited liability company and partners of a limited liability partnership or partnership.
Status: S: REFERRED TO LABOR (Jan 07, 2026)
Assessment: This bill amends New York's Workers' Compensation Law to extend personal, joint, and several liability for workers' comp award payments to individual members of LLCs and partners of LLPs and partnerships — not just corporate officers as under prior law. If your brokerage is structured as an LLC or partnership and a carrier or worker successfully argues an employment relationship exists, your individual members could face personal liability for unpaid awards. The direct reclassification risk is indirect, but the expanded personal liability creates a materially higher financial exposure for broker principals if your independent contractor relationships are ever challenged.
Recommended action: Brokers operating as LLCs or partnerships in New York should monitor this bill and consider opposing it, as it exposes individual members and partners to personal liability for workers' compensation violations by their business entity.
Ohio (OH) — 2 bills
Last action: Feb 4, 2026 (103 days ago)
8/10 SCORESUPPORT
Regards employment under Ohio's overtime and minimum wage laws
To amend sections 4111.03 and 4111.14 and to enact section 4111.20 of the Revised Code regarding the distinction between employees and independent contractors under Ohio's overtime and minimum wage laws.
Status: H: Referred to committee: Commerce and Labor (Feb 04, 2026)
Assessment: This bill enacts new section 4111.20 and amends Ohio's minimum wage and overtime statutes to embed a seven-factor safe harbor specifically for motor carrier owner-operators — covering vehicle ownership, cost responsibility, mileage-based pay, means-and-manner control, written IC contracts, and economic risk — that, when met, excludes the individual from the definition of 'employee.' For your business, this directly reduces misclassification exposure under Ohio wage law by giving carriers and brokers a clear, codified standard to structure owner-operator agreements around. The motor carrier carve-out mirrors similar federal protections and strengthens your ability to defend IC arrangements against state-level wage and overtime claims.
Recommended action: Brokers and carriers operating in Ohio should actively support this bill, as it codifies a multi-factor safe harbor that explicitly protects owner-operator IC status under Ohio's minimum wage and overtime laws.
HB840 RECENT ACTIVITY
Last action: May 13, 2026 (5 days ago)
5/10 SCORENEUTRAL
Regards pay, workers' comp for transportation network drivers
To amend sections 4121.01, 4123.01, 4123.26, 4123.29, 4123.35, 4925.01, and 4925.10 and to enact sections 4925.15, 4925.16, 4925.17, 4925.18, 4925.19, 4925.20, 4925.25, 4925.26, 4925.27, and 4925.28 of the Revised Code regarding minimum pay, workers' compensation, and other requirements applicable to transportation network company drivers.
Status: H: Referred to committee: Commerce and Labor (May 13, 2026)
Assessment: This bill explicitly designates transportation network company (TNC) drivers as employees under Ohio's workers' compensation and workplace safety statutes, but only during 'passenger platform time' or 'dispatch platform time' — terms defined within the TNC-specific Chapter 4925 framework, which applies to rideshare platforms, not freight brokers or motor carriers. Your broker and owner-operator relationships fall under the separate motor carrier exclusion in Sec. 4121.01(A)(4)(b), which this bill preserves intact with its multi-factor independent contractor test. The primary risk for your business is indirect: Ohio regulators or plaintiffs could cite this TNC employee-classification model as a template for future freight sector reclassification efforts, so you should track how the bill's definitions are drafted and whether 'transportation network company' could ever be interpreted to include freight dispatch or load-matching platforms.
Recommended action: Monitor this bill closely to confirm whether its TNC-specific worker classification framework remains limited to rideshare drivers or is written broadly enough to be cited as precedent for reclassifying freight owner-operators under Ohio workers' compensation law.
Pennsylvania (PA) — 3 bills
Last action: Apr 9, 2025 (404 days ago)
9/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Providing for criteria for independent contractors and for powers and duties of the Department of Labor and Industry and the Secretary of Labor and Industry; and imposing penalties.
An Act providing for criteria for independent contractors and for powers and duties of the Department of Labor and Industry and the Secretary of Labor and Industry; and imposing penalties.
Status: S: Referred to Labor & Industry (Apr 09, 2025)
Assessment: This Pennsylvania bill establishes a multi-prong test for independent contractor status covering workers' compensation and unemployment compensation — requiring a written project-specific contract, freedom from control, AND proof the individual is customarily engaged in an independently established business (itself requiring five additional sub-criteria including separate business location, profit/loss risk, and prior multi-client work history). Beyond the classification test, the bill creates stop-work order authority, civil penalties up to $2,500 per worker per violation, criminal penalties up to a third-degree felony for repeat offenders, triple-damages private rights of action, and — critically — a provision in Section 4(e) that exposes any party that 'contracts or renews a contract with an employer knowing the employer will misclassify' workers to the same penalties, directly targeting brokers who arrange freight through carriers that misclassify drivers. The combination of a demanding multi-factor IC test, stop-work authority, treble damages, and broker-facing joint liability makes this one of the most operationally threatening classification bills your Pennsylvania business could face.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Pennsylvania should actively oppose this bill and engage with the legislature to prevent its passage, as it would dramatically increase legal and financial exposure for using independent owner-operators.
Last action: Jun 24, 2025 (328 days ago)
8/10 SCORESUPPORT
In liability and compensation, providing for registration of status as independent contractor.
An Act amending the act of June 2, 1915 (P.L.736, No.338), known as the Workers' Compensation Act, in liability and compensation, providing for registration of status as independent contractor.
Status: S: Referred to Labor & Industry (Jun 24, 2025)
Assessment: This Pennsylvania bill amends the Workers' Compensation Act to create a voluntary registration system where owner-operators can affirmatively file as independent contractors, execute a written waiver of all WC benefits, and relieve your business of any obligation to provide WC coverage or pay into the Uninsured Employers Guaranty Fund for that individual. The protection is anchored to federal income tax classification as an IC, meaning owner-operators already filing as independent businesses qualify — a standard most of your carrier relationships already meet. This is a direct safe harbor mechanism that reduces your workers' compensation exposure in Pennsylvania and strengthens the legal foundation for your broker-carrier contracting model.
Recommended action: Engage with Pennsylvania legislators and industry associations to support passage of this bill, which creates a formal registration mechanism that shields your business from workers' compensation liability for properly registered independent contractors.
Last action: Jun 18, 2025 (334 days ago)
6/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Providing for interagency cooperation regarding employee misclassification; and establishing the Employee Misclassification Working Group.
An Act providing for interagency cooperation regarding employee misclassification; and establishing the Employee Misclassification Working Group.
Status: H: Re-reported as committed / Third consideration and final passage (108-95) (Jun 11, 2025) · S: Referred to Labor & Industry (Jun 18, 2025)
Assessment: This bill creates a coordinated, multi-agency enforcement infrastructure — linking the Department of Labor and Industry, Department of Revenue, and Office of Attorney General — specifically to pursue misclassification investigations, including sharing tax data across bureaus covering workers' comp and unemployment. While the bill does not establish a new classification test or directly redefine IC status, it materially increases Pennsylvania's enforcement capacity and interagency coordination against arrangements like yours. The practical risk is that your owner-operator contracts become targets of cross-referenced audits even under existing law, raising compliance exposure without any new safe harbor or protection.
Recommended action: Engage with Pennsylvania legislative contacts and industry associations to monitor how this working group's enforcement strategies are developed and whether they target owner-operator arrangements in trucking.
Tennessee (TN) — 2 bills
Last action: Feb 5, 2026 (102 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 29 and Title 39, relative to criminal offenses.
As introduced, creates the new criminal offenses of systematic unauthorized employment and aggravated systematic unauthorized employment; establishes the tort of unfair competition. - Amends TCA Title 29 and Title 39.
Status: H: P2C, ref. to Commerce Committee - Judiciary Committee / Assigned to s/c Banking & Consumer Affairs Subcommittee (Feb 05, 2026)
Assessment: This bill creates felony-level criminal liability for knowingly using an independent contractor or subcontractor 'substantially reliant on unauthorized labor,' and explicitly criminalizes misclassifying a worker as an independent contractor to evade employment verification — both provisions that could be stretched to implicate brokers who contract with carrier companies employing foreign-born drivers. The joint and several liability clause in §39-13-317(d)(2) is particularly dangerous: it exposes brokers to restitution obligations — including back wages, unpaid benefits, workers' comp premiums, and damages to competing businesses — for violations committed by a contracted carrier. While the bill targets bad-actor employers exploiting unauthorized workers, the broad subcontractor liability language creates real legal risk for brokers who lack visibility into every carrier's workforce compliance practices.
Recommended action: Brokers should monitor this bill and engage with Tennessee legislators to clarify that legitimate freight broker-carrier IC arrangements are not swept into the 'misclassification' or 'subcontractor concealment' provisions.
Last action: Feb 5, 2026 (102 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 29 and Title 39, relative to criminal offenses.
As introduced, creates the new criminal offenses of systematic unauthorized employment and aggravated systematic unauthorized employment; establishes the tort of unfair competition. - Amends TCA Title 29 and Title 39.
Status: S: Passed on Second Consideration, refer to Senate Judiciary Committee (Feb 05, 2026)
Assessment: This bill creates felony criminal liability for 'misclassifying a worker as an independent contractor rather than an employee with intent to evade employment verification requirements' and imposes joint and several liability on brokers for restitution amounts tied to their subcontractors or independent contractors — both provisions that could directly expose your business. The aggravated offense further targets 'layers of subcontracting or misclassification schemes,' a description that could be applied to standard freight broker-carrier arrangements if a contracted carrier is later found to have employed unauthorized workers. Conviction also triggers license revocation and multi-year prohibitions on state contracting, which would be operationally devastating for your business.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Tennessee should monitor this bill and engage with legislators to clarify that legitimate independent contractor arrangements are not swept into the misclassification and joint liability provisions.
United States Congress (US) — 8 bills
Last action: Mar 5, 2026 (74 days ago)
9/10 SCORESUPPORT
21st Century Worker Act
A bill to clarify the classification of service provider payees as employees or independent contractors in Federal law.
Status: S: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. (Mar 05, 2026)
Assessment: This bill creates mandatory IC classification under federal law for any worker who qualifies as a business entity, bona fide sole proprietor, or formal bona fide contractor — categories that directly describe how most owner-operators and motor carriers engaged by logistics brokers are structured. The 'substantial economic relationship' standard that triggers mandatory employee classification requires the payor to set hours, demand substantially full-time exclusivity for four or more consecutive weeks, and base over 75% of pay on time worked — conditions that almost never exist in standard broker-carrier contracts. If enacted, this framework would apply to the FLSA and NLRA (Sections 201–202), replacing economic-realities and common-law tests with a clear, favorable federal standard that protects your contractor relationships from reclassification risk across multiple enforcement regimes.
Recommended action: Brokers should actively support this bill and urge Senate Finance Committee members to advance it, as it would federally lock in IC status for owner-operators who meet any one of several criteria that closely match typical broker-carrier arrangements.
Last action: Feb 20, 2026 (87 days ago)
9/10 SCORESUPPORT
Modern Worker Empowerment Act
To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the National Labor Relations Act to clarify the standard for determining whether an individual is an employee, and for other purposes.
Status: H: Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-505. / Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 431. (Feb 20, 2026)
Assessment: This bill amends both the FLSA and NLRA to establish a behavioral-control test for IC status — a worker is an independent contractor if you don't control the details of how they work and they bear entrepreneurial risk, which directly aligns with the owner-operator model your business depends on. Critically, it also explicitly prohibits regulators from using compliance requirements, safety standards, insurance mandates, or performance deadlines as factors pointing toward employee status — shielding your carrier agreements from the kinds of administrative challenges that have threatened IC arrangements in recent years. The NLRA amendment imports this same pro-IC standard into labor relations law, closing the door on NLRB reclassification attacks under a separate and potentially stricter federal test.
Recommended action: Brokers should actively support this bill and urge their congressional representatives to advance it through committee and to the floor.
Last action: Feb 20, 2026 (87 days ago)
8/10 SCORESUPPORT
Modern Worker Security Act
To ensure that the provision of portable benefits to an individual is not considered in determining whether such individual is an employee of a person.
Status: H: Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-506. / Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 432. (Feb 20, 2026)
Assessment: This bill explicitly prohibits portable benefits — such as health insurance, paid leave, workers' comp contributions, or retirement savings — from being used as a factor in determining employee status under any federal law, directly protecting your ability to offer these benefits to owner-operators without triggering reclassification. For logistics brokers, this is a meaningful safe harbor: you could voluntarily improve contractor relationships by contributing to portable benefits programs without the legal exposure that such arrangements currently carry. If enacted, this removes one of the most significant practical barriers to voluntarily supporting the financial security of your independent carrier network.
Recommended action: Brokers should support this bill and encourage its passage, as it removes a key legal risk that has historically deterred companies from voluntarily offering benefits to independent contractors.
Last action: Jul 9, 2025 (313 days ago)
8/10 SCORESUPPORT
Modern Worker Empowerment Act
A bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to harmonize the definition of employee with the common law.
Status: S: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (Jul 09, 2025)
Assessment: This bill amends the FLSA in two critical ways: it anchors the definition of 'employee' to 'usual common law rules' — a behavioral-control test where the right to direct the details of work determines employment status — and it narrows the definition of 'employ' from the broad 'suffer or permit to work' standard to 'suffer or permit an employee to work,' closing the loophole regulators have used to sweep independent contractors into employee status. For your business, this directly reduces the risk that DOL applies the expansive economic-realities test to reclassify your owner-operators as FLSA employees, which would trigger minimum wage, overtime, and recordkeeping obligations across your carrier network. The common law control standard is far more favorable to broker-contractor relationships where owner-operators retain control over how they perform their work.
Recommended action: Logistics brokers should contact their congressional representatives and trade associations to express support for this bill, as it would replace the expansive FLSA 'suffer or permit' employment standard with a common law control test that better protects independent contractor arrangements.
Last action: Jan 3, 2025 (500 days ago)
8/10 SCORESUPPORT
Protect the Gig Economy Act of 2025
To amend Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to protect the "gig economy" and small businesses that operate in large part through contractor services from the threat of costly class action litigation, and for other purposes.
Status: H: Introduced in House / Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. (Jan 03, 2025)
Assessment: This bill adds a new prerequisite to Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, barring any class action that alleges misclassification of employees as independent contractors — which is precisely the litigation vehicle plaintiffs' attorneys use to pursue coordinated, high-stakes reclassification claims against brokers and carriers. If enacted, workers alleging IC misclassification would be forced to litigate individually rather than as a class, dramatically reducing the financial leverage and settlement pressure these suits create. This is a direct procedural shield for your business model, stripping away the class action tool that makes misclassification litigation so costly and risky.
Recommended action: Brokers should support this bill and contact their representatives on the House Judiciary Committee to advance it, as it directly eliminates the class action mechanism most commonly used to pursue large-scale misclassification claims against broker-contractor arrangements.
Last action: Apr 9, 2026 (39 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Fair Compensation for Truck Crash Victims Act
To increase the minimum levels of financial responsibility for transporting property, and to index future increases to changes in inflation relating to medical care.
Status: H: Introduced in House / Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. (Apr 09, 2026)
Assessment: This bill raises the federal minimum liability insurance requirement for property carriers from $750,000 to $5,000,000 — a 567% increase — and mandates automatic quinquennial inflation adjustments tied to medical care costs. While this is an insurance and financial responsibility issue rather than a worker classification issue, it directly impacts your business by driving up carrier compliance costs, which will reduce the number of owner-operators who can afford to remain in the market and increase the rates you pay to those who do. Brokers dependent on a broad network of independent carriers should monitor this closely, as a sharply smaller carrier supply tightens your capacity and squeezes margins.
Recommended action: Brokers should engage with trade associations to oppose this bill, as the $5M minimum insurance mandate will significantly increase carrier operating costs and reduce the pool of available owner-operators willing or able to afford coverage.
Empowering App-Based Workers Act
A bill to promote transparency and accountability in covered digital labor platform work, and for other purposes.
Status: H: Introduced in House / Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. (Dec 11, 2025) · S: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (Jul 28, 2025)
Assessment: This bill targets 'covered digital labor platforms' — including warehousing and last-mile delivery — and explicitly frames algorithmic management and automated dispatch tools as mechanisms that 'hide control and enable misclassification' of workers as independent contractors. If your company uses app-based dispatch or load-matching platforms to assign freight to owner-operators, you could fall within the bill's scope, exposing you to transparency mandates, adverse action restrictions, and a congressional record that characterizes your operational tools as evidence of an employment relationship. The bill's findings section signals future enforcement and litigation risk by embedding a misclassification narrative directly into federal statutory language, which regulators and plaintiffs' attorneys could cite in proceedings against brokers.
Recommended action: Logistics brokers and freight companies using app-based dispatch platforms should monitor this bill and engage with industry groups to oppose provisions that treat algorithmic work allocation as evidence of misclassification or that impose new compliance burdens on platform-based contractor arrangements.
Last action: Sep 18, 2025 (242 days ago)
6/10 SCORENEUTRAL
Predatory Truck Leasing Prevention Act of 2025
To amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit the use of predatory commercial motor vehicle lease-purchase programs by certain motor carriers, and for other purposes.
Status: H: Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit. (Sep 18, 2025)
Assessment: This bill targets motor carriers that use lease-purchase programs where the carrier controls the driver's work, compensation, and debts while the driver accrues no equity — a definition broad enough that DOT rulemaking could capture arrangements common among owner-operators who lease through affiliated carrier entities. The relief provision allowing drivers to exit lease-purchase agreements retroactively adds financial and operational risk for carriers you contract with, potentially disrupting your capacity base. The bill does not directly redefine IC status, but its 'control over work and compensation' framing in the predatory program definition could bleed into classification discussions during rulemaking.
Recommended action: Monitor rulemaking closely, as the Secretary's regulations defining 'predatory' practices could extend to broker-arranged lease-purchase arrangements or impose new compliance obligations on carriers in your network.
Virginia (VA) — 2 bills
HB238 RECENT ACTIVITY
Last action: Apr 22, 2026 (26 days ago)
8/10 SCOREENACTED
Minimum wage and overtime wages; payment, of wages, misclassification of workers, civil actions.
Labor and employment; payment of wages; minimum wage and overtime wages; misclassification of workers; prevailing wage rate; civil actions. Provides that an employer that violates provisions relating to minimum wage, overtime wages provisions, the misclassification of workers, or the prevailing wage rate is subject to civil actions for the applicable remedies, damages, or other relief available in an action brought pursuant to the civil action provisions currently available for the nonpayment of wages. Such provisions currently available provide that an employee may bring an action in a court of competent jurisdiction to recover payment of the wages, and the court is required to award the wages owed, an additional equal amount as liquidated damages, plus prejudgment interest thereon, and reasonable attorney fees and costs. Under current law, if the court finds that the employer knowingly failed to pay wages to an employee, the court is required to award the employee an amount equal to triple the amount of wages due and reasonable attorney fees and costs. The bill also prohibits an employer from taking certain retaliatory actions against an employee because the employee reports any information or allegation in good faith that, if true, amounts to a violation of any federal or state law or regulation to a supervisor, manager, or officer, or to any governmental body or law-enforcement official, including a report made in the ordinary course of the employee's employment, regardless of whether such report refers to a particular law or regulation.
Status: H: House concurred in Governor's recommendation (64-Y 36-N 0-A) / Reenrolled / Reenrolled bill text (HB238ER2) / Signed by Speaker (Apr 22, 2026) · S: Senate concurred in Governor's recommendation (21-Y 18-N 0-A) / Signed by President (Apr 22, 2026)
Assessment: This bill expands civil remedies for worker misclassification under Virginia law — including liquidated damages equal to wages owed, triple damages for knowing violations, and mandatory attorney fees — and ties those enhanced penalties directly to the existing misclassification statute (§ 40.1-28.7:7) that uses IRS common-law guidelines to evaluate independent contractor status. For logistics brokers, the construction joint-liability provisions are less directly relevant, but the cross-referencing of misclassification claims to the full wage-payment penalty structure significantly raises the financial exposure if any owner-operator relationship is challenged. The IRS common-law test used as the classification standard is more broker-friendly than an ABC test, but the dramatically higher damages now available will incentivize more misclassification claims against your business.
Last action: Mar 14, 2026 (65 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Minimum wage and overtime wages; payment, misclassification of workers, civil actions.
Labor and employment; payment of wages; minimum wage and overtime wages; misclassification of workers; prevailing wage rate; civil actions. Provides that an employer that violates provisions relating to minimum wage, overtime wages provisions, the misclassification of workers, or the prevailing wage rate is liable to the employee for the applicable remedies, damages, or other relief available in an action brought pursuant to the civil action provisions currently available for the nonpayment of wages. Such provisions currently available provide that an employee may bring an action in a court of competent jurisdiction to recover payment of the wages, and the court is required to award the wages owed, an additional equal amount as liquidated damages, plus prejudgment interest thereon, and reasonable attorney fees and costs. Under current law, if the court finds that the employer knowingly failed to pay wages to an employee, the court is required to award the employee an amount equal to triple the amount of wages due and reasonable attorney fees and costs.
Status: H: Conference report agreed to by House (62-Y 35-N 0-A) (Mar 14, 2026) · S: Fiscal Impact statement From VCSC (3/14/2026 2:49 pm) / Conference report rejected by Senate (16-Y 21-N 0-A) / No further action taken / Failed to Pass from conference (Mar 14, 2026)
Assessment: This bill expands civil remedies for worker misclassification under § 40.1-28.7:7 by cross-referencing the full penalty structure in § 40.1-29(J), which includes liquidated damages equal to wages owed plus treble damages when an employer 'knowingly' failed to pay — meaning a misclassification finding against your business could now trigger these multiplied penalties, not just back wages. The IRS common-law control test preserved in § 40.1-28.7:7(B)-(C) provides some protection for legitimate owner-operator arrangements, but the expanded damages exposure and the presumption-of-employment default in any proceeding raise your litigation risk materially if your contractor relationships are challenged. The construction-specific joint-and-several liability provisions in § 11-4.6 are less directly applicable to freight brokerage, but the broadened civil action framework in § 40.1-29 applies across industries.
Recommended action: Logistics brokers should monitor this bill and engage Virginia lawmakers to ensure owner-operator relationships are not swept into its expanded misclassification liability and treble damages framework.
Vermont (VT) — 2 bills
Last action: Feb 25, 2025 (447 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
An act relating to enhancing enforcement of employment laws
An act relating to enhancing enforcement of employment laws
Status: H: Read first time and referred to the Committee on General and Housing (Feb 25, 2025)
Assessment: This bill creates a California PAGA-style private enforcement mechanism under Vermont law, explicitly defining 'aggrieved employee' to include individuals claiming they were misclassified as independent contractors — meaning your owner-operators or their representatives could sue you directly on behalf of the state. Relators (including unions and nonprofit advocacy groups) can seek the same penalties the Commissioner could impose, plus attorney's fees, with a financial incentive of 20-30% of recovered penalties. This dramatically expands misclassification enforcement exposure for your business beyond what the state agency alone could pursue, effectively deputizing adversarial third parties to audit and litigate your contractor relationships.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Vermont should engage with state legislators to oppose this bill, as it creates a private right of action specifically covering misclassification claims that could expose your business to costly litigation from owner-operators, unions, or whistleblowers.
Last action: Feb 25, 2025 (447 days ago)
6/10 SCOREOPPOSE
An act relating to expanding coverage of the minimum wage and overtime laws and maintaining the authority of the Attorney General to enforce complaints of employee misclassification
An act relating to expanding coverage of the minimum wage and overtime laws and maintaining the authority of the Attorney General to enforce complaints of employee misclassification
Status: H: Read first time and referred to the Committee on General and Housing (Feb 25, 2025)
Assessment: The most consequential provision for your business is Section 4, which removes the scheduled July 1, 2026 repeal of the Vermont Attorney General's authority under 3 V.S.A. § 222d to investigate and enforce worker misclassification complaints — meaning that enforcement mechanism stays permanently active. The minimum wage increase to $20/hour and overtime expansions apply to employees, not independent contractors, but any Vermont-based owner-operators who could be reclassified would immediately fall under these elevated wage obligations, raising the financial stakes of any misclassification finding. This bill does not introduce a new classification test, but it sustains an enforcement mechanism that puts your IC relationships at continued regulatory risk in Vermont.
Recommended action: Brokers should monitor this bill because preserving the Vermont Attorney General's misclassification enforcement authority creates ongoing legal exposure for broker-contractor arrangements in the state.
Washington (WA) — 3 bills
Last action: Jan 12, 2026 (126 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Concerning labor standards and the Washington minimum wage act.
Concerning labor standards and the Washington minimum wage act.
Status: H: By resolution, reintroduced and retained in present status. (Jan 12, 2026)
Assessment: This bill introduces stop-work authority allowing Washington's Department of Labor and Industries to cease all business operations at any site where a minimum wage act violation is found — a direct operational threat to your brokerage if owner-operators or carrier relationships are scrutinized under the act. The bill also mandates paid vacation and bereavement leave starting January 1, 2027, and raises the minimum wage to $25/hour by 2032, creating compliance pressure if any contractor relationships are later reclassified as employment. The stop-work mechanism is the highest-risk element: a single violation finding could shut down your Washington operations until back wages, interest, and penalties are fully satisfied.
Recommended action: Engage with Washington state legislators and industry associations to oppose the stop-work order provision, which could halt your brokerage operations over minimum wage act violations.
Last action: Jan 12, 2026 (126 days ago)
8/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Concerning labor standards.
Concerning labor standards.
Status: H: By resolution, reintroduced and retained in present status. (Jan 12, 2026)
Assessment: This bill introduces stop-work order authority allowing Washington's Department of Labor and Industries to cease all business operations at any site where a labor standards violation is found — a direct operational threat if a carrier or driver relationship is scrutinized under the state's wage laws. The bill also mandates paid vacation and bereavement leave for employees beginning January 1, 2027, and phases the minimum wage up to $25/hour by 2031, increasing pressure on any worker classification disputes where owner-operators could be recharacterized as employees subject to these standards. If any of your contracted drivers are found to be misclassified under Washington law, the stop-work mechanism and escalating penalties up to $5,000 per day could shut down affected operations until full back-pay and penalties are resolved.
Recommended action: Brokers operating in Washington should engage with state legislators and industry associations to oppose the stop-work order provision, which could halt your business operations over wage-law violations.
Last action: Jan 12, 2026 (126 days ago)
7/10 SCOREOPPOSE
Concerning labor standards.
Concerning labor standards.
Status: S: By resolution, reintroduced and retained in present status. (Jan 12, 2026)
Assessment: This bill introduces stop-work authority allowing Washington's Department of Labor and Industries to cease all business operations at any site where a labor standards violation is found — a mechanism that could be triggered against your brokerage or carrier partners over wage disputes. It also mandates paid vacation and bereavement leave starting January 1, 2027, and stages the state minimum wage up to $25/hour by 2031, all of which increase cost pressure on carriers you contract with and could complicate owner-operator arrangements if any are deemed employees. The stop-work order provision is the highest-risk element, as it carries daily civil penalties up to $5,000 and requires a probationary compliance period before release.
Recommended action: Brokers should monitor this bill and engage with Washington state legislators to oppose the stop-work order provision, which could halt your business operations for wage and labor standards violations.
Wisconsin (WI) — 1 bill
Last action: Mar 30, 2026 (49 days ago)
5/10 SCOREENACTED
Various changes to the worker’s compensation law, granting rule-making authority, making an appropriation, and providing a penalty. (FE)
An Act to repeal 102.01 (2) (ar); to renumber 102.15 (1) (a); to renumber and amend 102.16 (1), 102.17 (4) (a), 102.17 (9) (a) 1., 102.44 (1) (ag), 102.44 (1) (am) and 102.44 (1) (b); to amend 20.445 (1) (sm), 40.65 (2) (a), 102.11 (1) (intro.), 102.125 (2), 102.125 (3), 102.15 (2), 102.16 (4), 102.17 (1) (d) 1., 102.17 (1) (d) 2., 102.17 (1) (d) 3., 102.17 (4) (b), 102.17 (9) (b) (intro.), 102.18 (1) (a), 102.18 (1) (bp), 102.27 (2) (a), 102.32 (6m) (a), 102.42 (title), 102.44 (1) (c) 1., 102.59 (1), 102.61 (1m) (c), 102.75 (1g) (a), 102.75 (1g) (c), 102.81 (2), 102.82 (2) (a) (intro.), 102.82 (2) (am), 102.82 (2) (ar) and 102.82 (2) (b); to repeal and recreate 102.85 (1) and 102.85 (2); to create 102.125 (1m), 102.16 (1) (e), 102.17 (1) (a) 1m., 102.17 (1) (a) 5., 102.17 (1) (i), 102.17 (4) (a) 1., 102.17 (9) (a) 1e., 102.17 (9) (a) 1g., 102.42 (10), 102.44 (4o), 102.59 (4), 102.82 (2) (ab), 102.82 (2) (ad) and 943.395 (1) (e) of the statutes; to affect 2023 Wisconsin Act 213, section 25; Relating to: various changes to the worker’s compensation law, granting rule-making authority, making an appropriation, and providing a penalty. (FE)
Status: S: Senate Amendment 1 offered by Senators Smith, Carpenter, Dassler-Alfheim, Drake, Habush Sinykin, Hesselbein, L. Johnson, Keyeski, Larson, Pfaff, Ratcliff, Roys, Spreitzer, Wall and Wirch / Read a second time / Senate Amendment 1 rejected, Ayes 18, Noes 15 / Ordered to a third reading / Rules suspended to give bill its third reading / Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 32, Noes 1 / Ordered immediately messaged (Feb 11, 2026)
Assessment: This bill is primarily an administrative overhaul of Wisconsin's workers' compensation system — adjusting benefit rates, hearing procedures, and penalties for uninsured employers — with no ABC test or direct IC reclassification mechanism. However, one provision is worth watching: the bill expands fraud reporting requirements to cover insurers with evidence that an employer has misclassified employees to lower workers' comp premiums, which could draw indirect scrutiny to broker-carrier arrangements if regulators interpret worker classification broadly. The penalty escalation for uninsured employers is also relevant if any of your contracted carriers are found to lack coverage, as it signals a more aggressive enforcement posture.
West Virginia (WV) — 1 bill
Last action: Jan 20, 2026 (118 days ago)
6/10 SCORESUPPORT
Taxpayer Protection Act
The purpose of this bill is to ensure individual taxpayers are not misclassified.
Status: H: Filed for introduction / To Finance / Introduced in House / To House Finance (Jan 20, 2026)
Assessment: Unlike the ABC tests used in California or New Jersey — where prong B requires the work be outside the hiring entity's usual course of business — this West Virginia bill flips the presumption in favor of independent contractor status by default, placing the burden on the hiring entity to prove employment. The three factors required to establish employment all center on control and economic direction, which is closer to a common law test than a strict ABC test, making reclassification harder for regulators to achieve. Applied only to state personal income tax classification, this bill's scope is narrower than a full labor-law reclassification measure, but the favorable presumption and control-based standard are a net positive for your broker-carrier model if the framework influences broader enforcement posture.
Recommended action: Brokers should support this bill and encourage its advancement, as its ABC test is structured to presume IC status unless the hiring entity proves all three control-based factors — a notably more favorable standard than typical ABC tests used in other states.