This bill establishes a three-year, federally funded pilot program to provide guaranteed monthly cash payments to 10,000 eligible individuals, equivalent to local fair market rent, while studying its impact on financial stability and well-being.
Bonnie Watson Coleman
Representative
NJ-12
The Guaranteed Income Pilot Program Act of 2025 establishes a three-year pilot program to provide a monthly, unconditional cash payment to 10,000 eligible individuals, set at the local fair market rent for a two-bedroom home. This initiative aims to study the effects of guaranteed income on financial stability, health, and overall well-being, noting that payments will not affect eligibility for other federal assistance programs. The Department of Health and Human Services, in partnership with the IRS and an external research organization, will manage the program and report findings to Congress within specified timelines. Congress has authorized \$495 million annually from Fiscal Year 2026 through 2030 to fund this study.
The Guaranteed Income Pilot Program Act of 2025 is setting up a major, three-year experiment to test whether giving people a steady, no-strings-attached cash payment can stabilize their lives. The core idea is simple: select 20,000 eligible people (taxpayers aged 18 to 65) and split them into two groups. One group of 10,000 will receive a monthly cash payment equal to the fair market rent for a two-bedroom home in their ZIP code, or a similar amount determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). This program is a direct response to findings that millions of Americans—especially younger generations—are struggling with income volatility and can’t cover a simple $1,000 emergency expense, a problem that grew worse with the rise of the gig economy.
This isn't a fixed dollar amount across the country; the payment is hyperlocal. If you’re selected, your monthly check is tied to the cost of renting a two-bedroom place where you live. For someone in an expensive coastal city, that check could be significantly higher than for someone in a lower-cost rural area. The goal is to provide a baseline income that actually reflects the cost of living, which is a crucial detail often missing from federal assistance programs. However, the bill does give the HHS Secretary some wiggle room to adjust that amount if the fair market rent calculation seems off, which introduces a slight element of uncertainty in the benefit level.
One of the biggest hurdles for any pilot program that gives out cash is making sure it doesn't accidentally disqualify people from other necessary benefits like SNAP, Medicaid, or housing assistance. The bill addresses this head-on, which is a huge win for participants. Any money received through this pilot will not count as income for determining eligibility for any federal, state, or local program that uses federal funds. Even better, it won't count as a resource (like savings) for a full 12 months after it’s received. This means participants can receive the guaranteed income without the fear of losing their existing safety net, allowing the study to truly measure the impact of the cash itself, not the stress of navigating benefit cliffs.
This is a research project first and foremost, backed by $495 million authorized annually from 2026 through 2030. The Secretary of HHS and the IRS Commissioner are teaming up with an external, non-partisan research group to run the show. The IRS’s job is critical here: they have to share tax records and keep the Secretary updated on changes to participants’ taxable income. This level of data sharing is intense, but necessary for a deep dive into how the cash affects people’s finances (micro-economic outcomes) and their health. The research will specifically look at whether steady income helps reduce the "social costs" of instability—things like better health, stable housing, and improved job prospects. We can expect an interim report to Congress within two years of the program starting, with a final report 12 months after the program wraps up, including participant feedback from interviews and focus groups. This rigorous study design suggests the data gathered will be robust enough to inform future, larger policy decisions.