A “claim shark” is the term given to an agent or company that charges veterans to help them file their initial claims for U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits. The process to file a claim for VA benefits is free, yet claim sharks usually charge upwards of $5,000 for their services despite the existence of accredited individuals and accredited veteran service organizations (VSOs) that offer free assistance to veterans in filing their VA benefits claims.
While it is technically illegal for claim sharks to operate under federal law, there is currently no criminal penalty for violating the law and no regulation of the practice. Consequently, claim sharks often use aggressive, misleading, and predatory tactics to persuade the veteran to let them guide, assist, advise, or consult with the veteran in filing a VA claim.
Federal Legislation Stalls
In 2022, the Governing Unaccredited Representatives Defrauding (GUARD) VA Benefits Act was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill would have reinstated criminal penalties for unaccredited claim representatives who charge unauthorized fees while assisting veterans with filing a claim for VA disability compensation benefits. The bill was introduced again in 2023, but no action was taken to advance the bill.
In May 2025, the Certified Help Options in Claims Expertise (CHOICE) for Veterans Act was advanced by the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. The bill would allow individuals who work at for-profit companies to seek accreditation and legally charge veterans fees for assisting them in filing disability claims in all 50 states. As of September 2025, the bill has not been considered by the full House of Representatives.
In July 2025, the VA Claim Sharks Effective Warning Act was introduced in the U.S. Senate. The Act would require the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to warn veterans more effectively about unaccredited VA claims representatives. As of September 2025, the bill remains in the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs.
State Legislation Advances
In the absence of federal law to regulate the operations of claim sharks, several states have advanced their own legislation to prohibit or limit operations of unaccredited claims representatives or companies. At least 14 bills related to this topic have been enacted in 12 states since 2015. Some states have completely prohibited the compensation of claims sharks while also placing guardrails on the compensation of those agents and VSOs that are authorized under federal law to provide assistance. Other states allow compensation but require claim sharks to provide written disclosures to veterans that the services they are providing may be free of charge if performed by an accredited agent or organization.
While Kansas has not yet enacted any legislation on the topic, two bills illustrating the competing ways to address the issue were introduced in the 2025 Legislative Session.
Kansas Legislation
In 2025, Kansas considered two veterans claim sharks bills. 2025 HB 2213 would have provided an outright prohibition against such compensated services. 2025 HB 2214 would have allowed such service but with certain restrictions and required disclosures.
HB 2213
HB 2213 was introduced by a representative of the Veterans of Foreign Wars and was heard by the House Committee on Veterans and Military.
The bill would prohibit any person from receiving compensation for assisting any individual about any veterans benefits matter. If a person were to receive compensation, the person would be held to the same ethical standards as an attorney under the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct, specifically the rules regarding advertising, new client solicitation, confidentiality, and specific duties. The bill would also prohibit any compensated referrals for such compensated assistance. Violations under the Act would be considered a violation of the Consumer Protection Act.
In the House Committee hearing on the bill, representatives of accredited VSOs provided proponent testimony. The representatives stated claim sharks’ operations have escalated since the passage of the federal PACT Act, which expanded eligibility for veterans to receive disability claims. Opponents of the bill included three for-profit companies providing claims assistance. Opponents expressed frustration that their companies had not been able to become accredited by the VA under current law, and stated that veterans should be able to choose who they want to assist them with their claims.
HB 2214
HB 2214 was introduced by a representative of the Veterans Benefits Guide and was heard by the House Committee on Veterans and Military.
The bill, known as the Safeguarding American Veteran Empowerment (SAVE) Act, would prohibit an individual from receiving compensation for referring a veteran to another person for advice or assistance in such veteran’s benefits matter. It would also apply to any services in connection with any claim filed within one year of a veteran’s active-duty release, unless the veteran acknowledges via a signed waiver that the veteran is choosing to deny the free services available.
The bill would require any person seeking compensation for assisting with any veterans benefits matter to obtain an agreement specifying the amount to be paid, signed by both parties. Moreover, if a veteran’s claim is successful and the veteran receives an increase in awarded benefits, the bill would specify that the individual who assisted could receive additional compensation in an amount not to exceed five times the amount of the monthly increase in benefits awarded. The bill would prohibit any initial or nonrefundable fees. The bill would also prohibit any person from directly or implicitly guaranteeing a certain outcome.
The bill would require such persons receiving compensation for assisting with a veteran’s benefits matter to:
- Provide a disclosure at the outset of the business relationship to the veteran and with specific requirements of style, placement, and wording;
- Retain copies of such disclosures;
- Not use international call centers or data centers for processing veterans’ personal information;
- Not use a veteran’s personal login or personal credentials to access such veteran’s medical, financial, or government benefits information; and
- Ensure that any person with access to veterans’ medical or financial information undergoes a criminal history record check conducted by a reputable source prior to having access to that information.
Any violation of the SAVE Act would constitute an unfair, false, misleading, or deceptive act or practice in the conduct of trade or commerce. Civil penalties would be in an amount ordered by the district court in an action brought by the Attorney General.
In the House Committee hearing on the bill, the representatives who opposed HB 2213 testified as proponents, stating the bill would allow companies to receive fair compensation with appropriate disclosure of the terms of such compensation. Opponents to the bill included representatives of VSOs, who expressed concerns that the proponents advocating for this bill would still remain unaccredited and thus unaccountable under federal law.
By Natalie Nelson and Molly Pratt
See Veterans, Military and Security for more.