A Republican-backed bill advancing in Kansas could allow for-profit companies to continue charging veterans steep fees for help filing disability claims despite these being services that veterans’ organizations and accredited advocates already provide for free.
The legislation, originally introduced as House Bill 2214, does not ban so-called veteran “claim sharks,” but instead regulates their operations.
Opponents say the approach leaves veterans vulnerable to unnecessary and potentially exorbitant charges while raising legal concerns over conflicts with federal law.
Why It Matters
The bill could allow veterans to pay thousands of dollars for help they can already receive for free, potentially reducing the long‑term value of their disability benefits.
Veterans service organizations warn that for‑profit claims consultants often charge fees tied to a veteran’s future benefit increases, meaning the cost can grow well beyond what many veterans initially expect.
What To Know
The new law permits unaccredited, for-profit claims consultants to charge veterans for assistance navigating the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs disability claims process. That assistance is already available at no cost through accredited veterans service organizations like the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) and county veterans service officers.
“The law allows for-profit entities to assist veterans in qualifying for disability benefits, services that are already available for free through the VA,” Kevin Thompson, CEO of 9i Capital Group and host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek. “Some will argue this creates competition and expands access. Others will see it as an opportunity to take advantage of individuals who may not fully understand the process.”
The bill’s supporters argue the VA claims process can be confusing and time-consuming, and that private companies provide an option for veterans seeking help. Those against the law counter that charging for such services exploits veterans, particularly older ones overwhelmed by paperwork, while offering little added value beyond what is already freely available.
“Veterans Guardian, and consultants like them, does not act as an agent or attorney on behalf of Veterans,” a spokeswoman from Veterans Guardian, a proponent of the bill, told the Kansas Reflector. “VG helps the veteran prepare their claim and does not engage with the VA on behalf of the veteran. Therefore, any claim that the claims consults are acting illegally is not factually accurate.”
Jim Karleskint, former Republican state lawmaker and current VFW lobbyist, disagreed on the Kansas Reflector podcast.
“They complete it, and the veteran hits the enter key and that’s what puts it in place,” Karleskint said. “It’s a technicality, in my opinion.”
The Kansas House initially passed the bill 81-43, falling just short of a veto-proof majority. However, when packaged with other legislation, both chambers later approved the bundle with veto-proof margins, sending it to the governor for consideration.
Veterans advocates say the bill opens the door for aggressive marketing tactics and high fees tied to future benefit increases, potentially costing veterans thousands of dollars over time for help they did not need to pay for.
“There will inevitably be veterans who pay for services they could have received at no cost. That is the concern,” Thompson said. “States like Maine, New Jersey, and New York have pushed back on similar provisions, but in some southern districts this appears to be another layer of complexity that could lead to confusion and, ultimately, exploitation of those who fall through the cracks.”
What People Are Saying
Drew Powers, founder of Illinois-based Powers Financial Group, to Newsweek: “There is a reason these outfits are called ‘claim sharks,’ and that is because they are predators, pure and simple. These same types of services have already been found illegal in other states. Why does Kansas think this time it will be different? All 81 of the ‘yes’ voters should be ashamed of themselves. They are responsible for the continued financial abuse of our veterans.”
Alex Beene, financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, to Newsweek: “For veterans, this technically means more choices, but it also opens the door for some to pay thousands of dollars for a service advocates argue should never have a price tag in the first place. The bigger long-term risk is that Kansas may have normalized a model that invites more aggressive firms into this space.”
What Happens Next
With the bill approved by both chambers, the final decision now rests with the governor.
If signed into law, Kansas would formally allow for-profit claims consultants to continue operating under state regulation, even as questions remain about the legality and financial impact on veterans.
Read the full article here
