As Congress and state legislatures debate how to safeguard veterans’ disability benefits, a fast-growing industry of for-profit claims consultants is pouring millions of dollars into lobbying and legal fights to preserve a business model that has become both enormously profitable and fiercely controversial.

At the center of the national struggle is Veterans Guardian, a North Carolina company that has helped tens of thousands of veterans pursue disability claims, and that has collected tens of millions of dollars in fees in the process. Federal law has long prohibited charging veterans for help with filing initial disability claims unless the representative is accredited by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Yet a loophole that eliminated criminal penalties in 2006 has allowed businesses and consultants without accreditation to expand, even as the VA warns that many operate outside the law.

The push to regulate or ban these companies has accelerated since Congress passed the PACT Act in 2022, which triggered the largest surge of disability filings in decades. Backlogs grew. Veterans waited months for decisions. Into that frustration stepped firms that marketed faster results and expertise for a price. Critics say those promises are misleading, since every claim ultimately ends up in the same VA processing system.

Veterans Guardian says it is filling a need created by a system that leaves veterans confused and waiting. The company assisted about 30,000 veterans last year and has spent heavily to defend its model. Public records show the firm spent $1 million on federal lobbying in 2024, more than $2 million over the past three years, and $1.8 million so far in 2025. Its state-level spending in 2024 exceeded $400,000. Veterans Benefits Guide, a major competitor based in Nevada, spent $420,000 on federal lobbying in 2025.

According to an investigative story in the Washington Post, disability ratings of 100 percent once were granted to only the most incapacitated veterans, typically those whose wounds precluded them from taking civilian jobs. But today, the maximum rating of 100 percent is by far the most commonly held one. Of the roughly 6 million veterans receiving disability payments in 2024, 1.5 million are designated 100 percent disabled. This is a nearly ninefold increase since 2021.

Unaccredited consultants, entrepreneurs, and influencers “hype the 100 percent threshold as “the holy grail” because it pays about $50,000 a year, tax-free, and comes with no-cost health care and a host of other perks.”

Companies typically charge veterans amounts equal to several times their monthly benefit increase. For a veteran whose disability rating jumps dramatically, the bill can exceed $20,000.

This means the profits at stake for the for-profit claims consultants are enormous. A 2021 Securities and Exchange Commission filing estimated that the VA claims consulting market was worth $73 billion per year. 

The consulting model has drawn lawsuits from veterans and criticism from lawmakers of both parties. A whistleblower lawsuit unsealed in federal court accuses Veterans Guardian of manipulating medical assessments, coaching veterans to present symptoms in specific ways, and steering applicants toward diagnoses that could yield higher benefit ratings. Veterans Guardian denies the allegations and says the claims misrepresent its work.

The disputes have intensified as states attempt to step in. Maine, New Jersey, and New York have passed laws banning unaccredited consultants.  In New Jersey, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Veterans Guardian v. Platkin vacated a lower court ruling and questioned the constitutionality of New Jersey’s GUARD Act. The court ruled that such restrictions likely violate the First Amendment, stating: “Laws that ban charging for speech burden the right to speak.” Veterans Guardian has also sued to stop the enforcement of the law in Maine. 

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and South Dakota have all passed laws allowing the companies to operate under various restrictions. In 2024, Louisiana permitted unaccredited consultants to charge up to $12,500 for claims assistance despite objections from veterans groups and the state’s own Department of Veterans Affairs. In Nebraska, lawmakers advanced a proposal to classify paid unaccredited claims consulting as a deceptive trade practice. 

Supporters of the bills across the country say veterans have been misled into contracts that cost them thousands of dollars for services that accredited agents and veterans service organizations provide for free.

In West Virginia, lawmakers are weighing a bill that would reinstate penalties for unaccredited claims consulting. Veterans there described cases in which private companies aggressively pursued fees or pressured veterans into payment plans after veterans had already received free help from accredited service officers. Veterans Guardian and its allies have argued that prohibiting their services infringes on veterans’ rights to seek assistance as they choose.

California, home to the largest veteran population in the country, is preparing for a decisive vote on Senate Bill 694 in early 2026. The measure would empower the state attorney general to prosecute unaccredited consultants who charge veterans for claims assistance. The bill would align California laws with federal VA regulations. Sponsored by Senator Bob Archuleta (D), Chair of the Senate Committee on Military and Veterans Affairs, it has broad bipartisan support and was advanced unanimously by the Senate Judiciary Committee. 

“This bill is about protecting the most vulnerable members of our community from being exploited by companies that are charging thousands for something veterans can get for free from accredited sources,” Josh J. Baker, California State Commanders Veterans Council (CSCVC) Legislative Director, said.

The proposal has drawn strong backing from the California Legislative Black Caucus, which raised concerns about longstanding inequities in how Black veterans’ claims are processed. Supporters said predatory fees worsen the burdens on veterans who already wait months for decisions.

Veterans Guardian, Veterans Benefits Guide, and other for-profit firms have campaigned aggressively against state bans. 

Opposition comes from groups including the Black Veterans Empowerment Council, a Maryland-based nonprofit that has lobbied against similar bills in several states. In 2024, Veterans Guardian entered into a strategic partnership with Black Veterans Empowerment Council.  In a recent letter to Nevada lawmakers, BVEC argued that bans deny veterans the freedom to choose how to pursue their claims. It instead urged lawmakers to adopt measures such as fee caps, mandatory disclosures, limits on solicitation practices, and restrictions on overseas data processing.  

The battle has also reached Congress. Two competing federal bills offer starkly different futures. The GUARD Act, backed by the Veterans of Foreign Wars and attorneys general from more than forty states, would restore criminal penalties for unaccredited paid assistance. It has more than 100 cosponsors in the House. 

A rival measure known as the CHOICE Act advanced out of committee this year and would allow attorneys and agents to charge ill and injured veterans fees of up to $12,500 or the amount equal to five times the monthly benefits increase, whichever is less, and if the claim results are favorable. The Disabled American Veterans strongly oppose this bill. “DAV believes this is wrong—period,” said DAV National Commander Coleman Nee.

A third bill, the PLUS Act, would allow companies like Veterans Guardian to become accredited and charge capped fees. Veterans Guardian executives and donors have contributed heavily to the sponsors of the PLUS Act, according to federal campaign filings.

The stakes for veterans are considerable. Free accredited assistance is available through organizations such as the American Legion, Disabled American Veterans, AMVETS, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and county veterans service officers. Accredited lawyers and agents must pass background checks, take training courses, and submit fee agreements for review. Veterans who receive help from unaccredited consultants have no such protections. If a claim contains inaccuracies or misrepresentations, advocates warn, the veteran could face serious consequences while the consultant faces none.

Many veterans who turned to private firms say they did so out of desperation, not preference. The VA disability system is complex and slow, with hundreds of thousands of pending claims at any given time. Some veterans waited months simply to secure an appointment. Others said they were unaware that free accredited help existed. Some believed that for-profit consultants had special insight into how to speed up a ruling, even though all claims follow the same process once they reach the VA.

Consumer complaints have accumulated. Attorneys general in multiple states have received reports from veterans who were billed thousands of dollars for minimal assistance or were pressured to emphasize conditions they did not believe were central to their disability. Several veterans told state investigators collection agencies contacted them after refusing to pay disputed fees. Courts are now weighing allegations that some companies violated federal law by preparing claims on behalf of veterans and mailing packets designed to be filed as-is.

Veterans Guardian maintains that it follows the law and fills a critical need created by a system that often leaves veterans waiting without answers. The company says most clients come to them only after trying free options. It also says its fees are contingent on results and that veterans can review all terms before signing. Company leaders have acknowledged they could seek VA accreditation but say the current system would require them to provide services free of charge, which they argue is not feasible.

As the battles continue, the national debate has broadened into a referendum on who controls the disability benefits process and how to protect the monthly payments that millions of veterans rely on. Some lawmakers warn that without federal penalties, states will remain locked in legal disputes that could take years to resolve. Others argue that the absence of accredited service officers nationwide leaves too many veterans with too few choices.

The issue has drawn national investigative attention, including a Washington Post interactive report examining how companies capitalize on disability ratings and how those ratings are assigned. Advocates said the report underscores the urgency of creating consistent rules as demand for benefits grows.

For now, the landscape remains fractured. Bans or consumer laws protect veterans in some states. In others, companies remain free to charge fees far exceeding what accredited representatives can collect for appeals. Congress has yet to settle on a path, and the VA has limited enforcement power.

Veterans service organizations say the stakes could not be higher. They argue the country owes a clear promise to those who served and that leaving veterans to navigate conflicting rules and costly contracts violates that commitment. Supporters of the consulting industry counter that the fee-for-service model reflects the realities of a strained system and that many veterans prefer to pay for guidance they believe will improve their chances.

As lawmakers prepare for another round of debates in 2026, one thing appears clear. The multibillion-dollar struggle over veterans’ benefits is only growing more intense, and the outcome will determine who gets paid, who gets protected, and how the federal government fulfills its promise to the people who served.