Editor's Note: This article has been updated with quotes from Dr. Thomas Dieters and Joseph Dzierwa.

Currently, two competing initiatives - one federal, one state - have taken center stage, both with the stated goal of redefining and improving the culture of college athletics regarding the new era of NIL. However, the way in which they are trying to accomplish that objective are very different.

At the federal level, the NCAA settlement in the House v. NCAA court case has allowed universities to make plans to compensate student-athletes directly from their athletic department revenues, capping Division 1 schools at $20.5 million annually to pay their student-athletes.

At the state level, Michigan House Bill 4643, proposed by Michigan State Representative Joe Tate earlier this week, promises to support, protect, and expand student-athletes' rights under state law.

Both the House settlement and House Bill 4643 purport to strive for a common goal of empowering student-athletes through transparency and fair compensation for their name, image, and likeness (NIL). However, there are legal and logistical conflicts between the federal settlement and the state bill.

The House v. NCAA case aimed to challenge the NCAA’s structure that restricts revenue sharing and to help athletes receive direct compensation. On June 7, US District Judge Claudia Wilken approved a legal settlement that allows Division 1 universities for the first time to share athletic department revenue with athletes.

Additionally, the House settlement includes market oversight, stating that any third-party NIL deal worth more than $600 must go through a national clearinghouse to ensure it meets fair market value and serves a legitimate business purpose.

Lastly, an important aspect of this settlement is complying with Title IX, which mandates equal opportunity rather than identical pay. This means that schools are not required to distribute their money evenly across athletes, sports, or gender.

Earlier this week, Michigan Representative - and former MSU football player - Joe Tate introduced House Bill No. 4643 which seeks to amend Public Act 366 of 2020. The bill aims to expand NIL protection for student-athletes, while also regulating the influence of the NCAA.

Some notable aspects of HB 4643 include not allowing universities to act as agents when helping to arrange NIL deals for athletes and severely restricting schools from reporting NIL deals or compliance data to athletic associations, like the NCAA.

“We want to make sure student-athletes have clarity,” Tate said in an Instagram post announcing the bill. “And ensure that they can be set up for success and be able to take advantage of name, image, and likeness in being compensated. Not only for their college career but ensuring they have a successful career beyond being a student-athlete.”

Tate claims this new legislation will help support student-athletes in the state of Michigan and allow for revenue sharing.

Both the House settlement and Michigan’s HB 4643 reflect the common goal of recognizing athletes as revenue-generating contributors and creating a system in which they get fair compensation as well as transparency in NIL deals.

For example, both the frameworks surrounding the federal and state legislation reject the prior restrictions that prevented athletes from profiting off their NIL rights and both introduce ideas for transparently, though they assuredly clash in their methods to do so.

The first area of friction, though, includes revenue sharing as the House settlement allows for universities to pay athletes directly, while the state legislation prohibits direct compensation from universities and institutions acting as financial mediators. This creates a conflict as the Michigan law could prohibit Michigan schools from doing what the settlement allows.

Another area of friction is the guidelines around reporting NIL deals. The federal policy requires schools to report NIL deals over $600 and revenue sharing to Deloitte, while the new state bill explicitly prohibits any reporting on NIL deals.

Lastly, if Tate's bill passes, Michigan institutions get put in a legal gray area as the federal settlement will authorize penalties if schools don’t comply with the structure, while the state law prohibits schools from accepting penalties related to NIL restrictions.

These gray areas and conflicts would seem to create operational confusion for Michigan schools moving forward, with the debate of complying with the federal settlement or state legislation.

The NCAA v. House settlement and Michigan’s HB 4643 represent a leap into a future for college athletes to be fully compensated for the revenue they generate. They both seek to highlight the growing pains in this new era of collegiate sports, but the uncertainties between the federal settlement and the state initiative leave Michigan universities in a somewhat conflicting position.

"This policy to amend the current NIL law allows all universities in the state of Michigan to provide maximum financial opportunities for their student-athletes without any artificial cap placed on compensation. In addition, it gives these institutions the opportunity to compete at the highest level nationally," said Dr. Thomas Dieters, Board President of Charitable Gift America (CGA), which runs several NIL collectives in the state of Michigan and throughout the country.

CGA has written more than 1,000 NIL contracts with students in the state of Michigan over the past four years and claims to be the only organization in the country which provides opportunities for international athletes to enter into NIL contracts.

Joseph Dzierwa, a star pitcher at Michigan State, supports Tate's bill.

“This gives (the state of) Michigan the chance to be a leader in college athletics," Dzierwa said in a release set to go out next week. "By removing the cap, the state is saying it believes in its student-athletes and wants to create an environment where we can thrive. That kind of support attracts talented athletes who want to be part of something special, which makes our programs stronger."

Tate's bill was introduced on June 12, 2025 and was assigned to the Regulatory Reform Committee, where it is unclear when - or if - it will get a hearing. Multiple calls by Spartans Illustrated to Rep. Tate's office Friday afternoon were greeted by a voicemail message. This story will be updated as more information becomes available.

Join the discussion on this article in our premium forums by clicking here.

You can also follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Threads, TikTok, Instagram, and Bluesky.

For video content, including our Red Cedar Radar and WE GOT IT podcasts, find us on YouTube and consider subscribing.