HB 2384 Advances Through CPC/JHA After Tough Questions on Direct NIL Payments

HONOLULU — One week after an emotional on-campus hearing at UH Mānoa, HB 2384 returned to the Capitol — and this time, the tone shifted.

The House Committee on Consumer Protection & Commerce (CPC) and Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs (JHA) held a joint hearing Thursday on HB 2384 HD1, the bill establishing a framework for Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) at the University of Hawai‘i Mānoa.

Unlike last week’s testimony-heavy session filled with student-athletes and coaches, this hearing centered on structure, funding mechanics and whether public dollars should be used for direct NIL payments.

By the end of the afternoon, the bill passed out of committee as an HD2 with amendments, moving it forward to Finance.

The Core Question: Public Dollars for Direct NIL?

UH Athletics Director Matt Elliott reiterated that NIL is now part of modern college athletics and that as of July 1, institutions are permitted to engage in direct NIL relationships with student-athletes.

But lawmakers pressed on how Hawai‘i plans to fund it.

Rep. Kim Coco Iwamoto raised one of the sharpest questions of the afternoon, asking:

“What makes the actors of the performing arts students at UH different than the athletic students at UH in terms of helping them, giving them resources, such as direct payment?”

Her concern centered on equity — whether allocating taxpayer dollars directly to athletes separates them from other UH students whose names, images or intellectual property may also benefit the university.

Later, during decision-making, she made her position clear:

“I will be voting no based on what we heard here today that other states are not directly funding NIL.”

She added that she was not comfortable prioritizing direct NIL payments “when there are so many other needs right now in our state”.

Iwamoto cast the lone “No” vote in CPC.

Chair Matayoshi: Supportive of Guardrails, Cautious on Structure

CPC Chair Scot Z. Matayoshi did not oppose the bill outright, but repeatedly questioned the funding model.

He emphasized that he supports the regulatory and educational aspects of the bill — including stronger financial literacy and agent oversight.

“I do really appreciate that part… requiring the University of Hawaii to set forth policies to give more financial literacy, tax information, financial management, agent representation. I think that’s all great.”

However, he expressed discomfort with the state directly appropriating $5 million for NIL payments.

“I am uncomfortable spending public taxpayer dollars to go directly to student athletes in that sense.”

He also questioned why Hawai‘i was structuring payments differently than other states, asking:

“Why are we doing $5 million to be directly given to student athletes?”

In response, Elliott explained that while some states are supplementing athletic department budgets broadly, Hawai‘i’s proposal makes the NIL allocation explicit to provide transparency.

Ultimately, Matayoshi recommended passing the bill with amendments to clarify in the language that the allocated funds would be used for direct NIL payments — ensuring that the Finance Committee reviews that structure carefully.

Judiciary Focus: Athlete Protections

On the JHA side, members focused less on the funding structure and more on policy safeguards.

Questions centered on whether the bill strengthens institutional policies, protects student-athlete rights and ensures transparency without invading privacy.

Elliott confirmed that while UH is already engaging in NIL relationships, the bill would require more comprehensive and formalized policies than currently exist.

JHA ultimately passed the measure with amendments.

Vote Breakdown – Feb. 19

Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs (JHA)

✔️ Passed with amendments

• 9 Ayes: Tarnas, Poepoe, Belatti, Kahaloa, Sayama, Takayama, Shimizu

• Ayes with Reservations: Cochran, Garcia

• Noes: None

• Excused: Hashem

Consumer Protection & Commerce (CPC)

✔️ Passed with amendments

• 5 Ayes: Matayoshi, Grandinetti, Chun, Ilagan, Kong

• Noes: Iwamoto

• Excused: Ichiyama, Lowen, Marten, Tam, Pierick

What This Means Going Forward

As HB 2384 advances to the House Finance Committee, the regulatory NIL framework appears to have gained traction, while the proposed $5 million direct public funding model remains under closer scrutiny. Finance will now evaluate the fiscal structure and determine how — and whether — the appropriation should move forward.