This bill rewrites Maryland’s minimum‑wage statute to create a predictable multi‑year schedule of wage increases followed by automatic, annual adjustments tied to local CPI growth. It also redefines “small employer,” explicitly includes governmental units in the employer definition, and preserves a lower trainee/ youth rate.
For practitioners: the measure gives employers and budget officers a clear path for future wages while creating an administrative mechanism — the Commissioner must calculate and announce annual CPI‑based changes. The statute limits annual increases to 5% and lays out rounding rules, but leaves open key implementation choices that will matter for payroll systems, municipal budgets, and compliance programs.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates a multi‑year floor for the State minimum wage and then requires annual adjustments based on the Washington‑area CPI, rounded to the nearest $0.05 and capped at a 5% year‑over‑year increase. The Labor Commissioner calculates and announces the adjustment each September using CPI data available by May 1.
Who It Affects
Employers are split by size: those above the new 49‑employee threshold face a faster phase‑in than employers at or below that threshold. The bill also covers governmental employers and preserves an 85% “youth” rate for employees under 18. Payroll, HR, and public‑sector budget teams will be directly affected.
Why It Matters
The combination of a multi‑year schedule and automatic indexing changes how organizations plan labor costs and budgets: private employers must adjust payroll cycles and pricing strategies, while state and local governments must account for recurring increases in personnel budgets.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill replaces the current statutory language with a two‑stage design: an initial, legislated multi‑year baseline followed by automatic, annual indexing. After the legislated phase‑in ends, the Labor Commissioner will compute year‑to‑year adjustments based on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the Washington–Arlington–Alexandria metropolitan area (the regional CPI).
Adjustments are computed from the most recent 12 months of CPI data available by May 1 and announced each September 1 for the following calendar year. Increases are rounded to the nearest $0.05 and capped at 5% of the prior year’s rate; if CPI shows no growth or a decline, the wage rate remains unchanged.
The statute creates different phase‑in lengths by employer size. Employers above the updated small‑employer threshold move to the higher legislated rate earlier, while employers at or below the threshold receive a longer phase‑in before reaching the same statutory target.
The law explicitly treats governmental units as employers, so public‑sector payroll systems and budget offices must apply the same schedule and indexing rules.The bill preserves an 85% permitted rate for employees under 18, meaning employers may pay those workers a subminimum equal to 85% of the State rate. The law also preserves the usual “higher of” rule relative to federal minimum wage: employers must pay whichever minimum (state or federal) is greater.
Finally, the text includes procedural guardrails — the Commissioner must make formal September announcements and may not temporarily suspend required increases — but it also grants the Commissioner responsibility for data choices and rounding that will determine the precise dollar outcome each year.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill raises the statutory baseline and phases wages so that larger employers reach the higher legislated rate earlier than employers with 49 or fewer employees, who receive a longer phase‑in.
For employers above the small‑employer threshold the bill sets the legislated baseline for a 48‑month period starting January 1, 2024, then imposes a higher legislated rate beginning January 1, 2028.
For employers with 49 or fewer employees the bill fixes the $15 baseline for a 60‑month period starting January 1, 2024, with the higher legislated rate taking effect January 1, 2029.
After the legislated steps, the Labor Commissioner will calculate annual adjustments using the Washington‑area CPI (data available by May 1), announce the next year’s rate each September 1, round to the nearest $0.05, and cap any increase at 5% per year; if CPI shows no growth or a decline, the wage stays the same.
The statute explicitly expands the small‑employer definition to 49 or fewer employees and treats governmental units as employers; it also allows employers to pay 85% of the State minimum to employees under 18.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Local CPI designated as the index
The bill ties indexing to the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI‑U) for the Washington–Arlington–Alexandria metropolitan area rather than a national CPI. That choice anchors adjustments to regional cost‑of‑living changes — which will produce different percentage changes than national CPI measures and matter for metropolitan Maryland employers and budgeting.
Small‑employer definition expanded to 49 or fewer employees
The previous small‑employer cutoff is replaced with a 49‑employee threshold. Practically, more employers qualify for the longer phase‑in and associated timing differences. Employers that previously were outside the small‑employer class may now fall inside it, changing which employers face the faster schedule and which receive the extended $15 baseline.
Two‑stage legislated phase‑in by employer size
The bill establishes a fixed baseline period during which a $15 rate applies (different calendar lengths by employer size), followed by a legislated jump to a higher rate on a specified January 1. For compliance teams that means distinct effective dates for payroll changes depending on headcount; for budgeting teams it creates a discrete step increase to prepare for in those specified fiscal years.
Annual automatic indexing: Commissioner’s role, rounding, and cap
This provision gives the Commissioner of Labor and Industry the administrative job of calculating average CPI growth, announcing the resulting wage rate each September 1, and applying rounding and a 5% ceiling. It also forbids temporary suspension of an increase and says that if CPI shows no growth or a decline, the rate holds. Agencies will need procedures and public notice practices to implement the Commissioner’s determination reliably.
Youth subminimum rate retained
Employers may pay employees under 18 a wage equal to 85% of the State minimum. That carve‑out remains intact and will require employers to track employee age for payroll classification. Its presence preserves a statutory distinction between adult and youth compensation even as base rates rise.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Employment across all five countries.
Explore Employment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Low‑wage workers in affected industries (retail, hospitality, food service, home care): they receive a predictable path to higher statutory minimums and then annual adjustments tied to local inflation.
- Employees in the Washington‑area labor market: indexing to the regional CPI preserves purchasing power relative to local prices, benefiting workers whose costs track Washington‑area inflation.
- Workers at employers that move more slowly to higher rates (small employers): the extended baseline gives those businesses time to adjust while still guaranteeing eventual parity at the higher legislated rates.
Who Bears the Cost
- Employers with 50 or more employees: they face a faster phase‑in to the higher legislated rate and will need to adjust payrolls, benefits calculations, and potentially pricing strategies sooner.
- State and local governments and public employers: because governmental units are explicitly included, municipal and state budgets must absorb recurring wage increases and future CPI‑linked adjustments.
- Payroll and HR systems teams: they must implement headcount‑based timing rules, apply annual September announcements to January payrolls, and handle rounding and youth‑rate classifications.
- The Labor Commissioner’s office: the agency bears ongoing administrative work — calculating CPI growth, making September announcements, and defending methodological choices — without an explicit funding mechanism in the text.
- Consumers and downstream vendors: businesses may pass increased labor costs into prices or reduce hours/staffing in ways that affect customers and suppliers in low‑margin sectors.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is trade‑off between predictable, inflation‑protected wages for low‑paid workers and the fiscal and operational strain that faster mandated increases place on employers — especially public employers and multi‑jurisdiction firms — with the Commissioner’s technical choices (index, timing, rounding, cap) deciding which side gets prioritized in practice.
The bill resolves one problem — predictable, inflation‑linked minimum wages — while creating several implementation questions. Anchoring indexation to the Washington‑area CPI changes outcomes relative to national measures and will matter for employers with operations across multiple regions; they will face different effective increases depending on which state or locality governs their workforce.
The Commissioner’s methodological choices (which 12‑month window to use, how to treat data revisions, and the technical calculation of “average percent growth”) are consequential but delegated; the statute prescribes timing and caps but not the level of transparency or appeal procedures for those determinations.
Capping increases at 5% smooths volatility but can let wages lag rapid inflation. Rounding to the nearest $0.05 is administratively tidy but can produce small distributional quirks when wages compound year to year.
Including governmental units creates direct fiscal pressure on public budgets with no appropriation language; municipalities and counties will need to reconcile the statutory mandate with budget cycles. Finally, retaining an 85% youth rate preserves employer flexibility but raises equity questions about whether age‑based subminimum rates remain justified as the baseline rises.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.