⚡NIMITZ NEWS FLASH⚡

“From Service to Startup: Empowering Veteran Entrepreneurs”

House Small Business Full Committee Hearing

December 10, 2025 (recording here)

HEARING INFORMATION

Witnesses & Written Testimony (linked):

• Mr. Kevin Schmiegel: Co-Founder & CEO, ZeroMils

• Ms. Misty Fox: Director, Entrepreneurship and Small Business, D’Aniello Institute for Veterans and Military Families

• Mr. Christopher Lefebvre: President & CEO, ISI Professional Services

• Ms. Rebecca Aguilera-Gardiner: CEO, Veterans In Business (VIB) Network

Keywords mentioned:

• Veteran employment, veteran entrepreneurs, TAP, rule of two, franchising, SBA, federal contracting, SDVOSB, VOSB, capital, military thriving communities, franchising, mentorship, procurement challenges, GI Bill

IN THEIR WORDS

OPENING STATEMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE

• Chair Roger Williams highlighted that roughly 1.6 million veteran-owned small businesses generated about $900 billion in revenue and employed more than 3.2 million Americans, but noted that many veterans returned home feeling behind their civilian peers and struggled with translating military skills, building new networks, and accessing capital. He emphasized the importance of programs like TAP and the SBA’s Boots to Business, celebrated the committee’s work to make Boots to Business permanent in the FY25 NDAA, and praised private-sector veteran leaders who provide mentorship and connections. He affirmed the committee’s role in identifying gaps, demanding accountability, and strengthening partnerships between government, the veteran community, and the private sector.

• Ranking Member Nydia Velázquez highlighted the codification of the Boots to Business program in the NDAA, calling it effective and widely used, but warned that other SBA veteran programs were less secure and that veterans were not shielded from broader economic challenges, including tariffs and attempts to cut funding for Veteran Business Outreach Centers. She noted that veteran-owned firms faced familiar small business challenges such as access to capital, reaching customers, hiring, and contracting, and stressed that women veterans and those in rural communities had additional, unique barriers. She urged continued funding and support for VBOCs and other targeted programs.

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS

• Mr. Kevin Schmiegel described founding Hiring Our Heroes and later leading two national nonprofits that raised $100 million and served about 4 million service members, veterans, first responders, and families before co-founding Zero Mills in 2022 to promote “military thriving” cultures centered on veteran-owned small businesses. He warned that while veteran businesses generate nearly $1 trillion and employ millions, veterans are now far less likely than civilians to own a business, dropping from roughly 50% of World War II veterans to under 5% of post-9/11 veterans, because the GI Bill lacks business-loan tools, TAP emphasizes entitlements over empowerment, and veteran firms lack a seat at key policymaking tables. He urged Congress to expand access to capital (including GI Bill-linked financing), embed veteran small businesses in transition and policy discussions, and boost VOSB visibility on installations and at TAP and hiring events so more post-9/11 veterans can start and grow businesses.

• Ms. Misty Fox described entrepreneurship as an identity and continuation of service for many veterans. She highlighted that veteran-owned businesses generate about $1.3 trillion in receipts, employ over 4 million people, pay more than $233 billion in payroll, and fail less often than civilian firms, with veterans crediting military planning and decision-making skills for their success, yet face fragmented support, rural access gaps, and difficulty securing capital and navigating federal procurement. She urged Congress to fully fund and strengthen OVBD and VBOCs, expand capital readiness and veteran-specific underwriting, ensure procurement and infrastructure policies expand rather than limit opportunity, and invest in outcome-focused data, arguing that veterans do not need guaranteed success—just guaranteed access.

• Mr. Christopher Lefebvre explained that he initially joined his company seeking stability, only later becoming CEO and realizing how little he knew about running a business despite strong leadership training. He argued that veteran entrepreneurship challenges stem from system design, not capability, describing a fragmented ecosystem where access to resources depends on geography or luck, programs lack warm handoffs, capital models do not fit veterans’ service histories, and procurement volatility and contract consolidation discourage investment and growth. He recommended creating a national navigation hub as a single front door, standardizing transitions between programs, making entrepreneurship exposure in TAP and Boots to Business mandatory, modernizing capital access (including GI Bill-linked training and finance), stabilizing procurement for veteran firms, and increasing transparency around nonprofit and VSO outcomes so veterans can move along a coherent continuum from interest to action.

• Ms. Rebecca Aguilera-Gardiner described her nonprofit as an advocate that educates and connects veteran-owned and service-disabled veteran-owned businesses to corporate and government contracting opportunities through efforts like the Bravo Corporate Mentor–Veteran Business Protégé program. She noted that roughly 1.6 million veteran-owned businesses employ over 5 million Americans and generate about $1 trillion annually but are mostly small firms with revenues under $500,000, and that VIB was created because corporations struggled to find veteran suppliers and federal tools were hard to use. She called for limiting the harm of category management and bundling, strengthening oversight and penalties when primes miss veteran utilization goals, updating sole-source thresholds and passing legislation like H.R. 2804, ensuring veterans are explicitly included as a standard diverse supplier category, and improving access to capital by addressing credit-history gaps and rigid SBA underwriting, arguing that removing bureaucratic barriers and ensuring fair access to contracts and capital would both honor veterans who “signed a blank check” and strengthen the broader economy.

•  Chair Williams asked how difficult it had been to navigate veteran business resources and how technology could help, and Mr. Schmiegel replied that the process had been hard, that consolidating resources under large nonprofits was the wrong approach, and that private sector-led tools like his military thriving small business toolkit could give veterans a seamless dashboard to start and grow firms.

• Chair Williams then asked about the timing of the Boots to Business course, and Ms. Fox said it was critical to offer it before transition and to expand it online and with follow-up touchpoints, since many veterans started businesses years after leaving service.

• Chair Williams asked about approaches to fostering entrepreneurship. Mr. Lefebvre explained that he viewed support as a continuum from ideation through exit, used tools like the SBA mentor–protégé program and joint ventures to mentor entrepreneurial employees, and partnered with programs like IVMF’s accelerators to help veterans move from ideas to execution.

• Chair Williams asked what was driving the decline in veteran entrepreneurship and how franchising fit in. Mr. Schmiegel said the main problem was lack of access to capital, noting that veterans were twice as likely as civilians to own franchises because they offered playbooks and better financing, and urged legislative reforms to expand capital access and reduce regulatory barriers for veteran franchisees.

• Ranking Member Velázquez asked about the current status and value of the SBA Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs and learned that the committee had gone dormant with no recent meetings or communication from SBA. Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner said the committee had been very valuable for direct engagement with SBA and for work on a new committee to connect veterans with corporations, but she had no idea what became of that progress.

• Ranking Member Velázquez then suggested sending a bipartisan letter to inquire about the committee’s status and asked what the importance of mentorship was. Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner emphasized that structured mentoring and her veteran-to-veteran and corporate mentor–protégé programs helped veterans navigate red tape and shorten the struggle of starting a business, while Mr. Lefebvre added that mentorship acted as a “force multiplier” but that many veterans lacked basic education on where to find those mentorship opportunities.

• Rep. Pete Stauber reflected on his family’s own difficulties with access to capital 15 years earlier and argued that veterans and witnesses already knew the solutions. He urged investment in the witnesses’ programs instead of more committees. He praised the panel as one of the best he had seen in seven years on the Small Business Committee and underscored the importance of rural veterans and their economic contributions to their hometowns.

• Rep. Hillary Scholten asked why franchising especially attracted veteran entrepreneurs. Mr. Schmiegel explained that franchising lets veterans be “in business for yourself but not by yourself,” offering SOP-like guardrails and structure they were used to in the military, while still giving them autonomy and leadership opportunities. He noted veteran-owned franchises were more likely to hire other veterans.

• Rep. Scholten then shifted to contracting, asking what Congress could do so veteran-owned small businesses could better compete beyond defense and VA. Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner stressed that veterans needed to actually win and repeatedly renew contracts, with Rule of Two protections and access to SDVOSB/VOSB certifications as growth tools, while Ms. Fox highlighted that training without market access set firms up to fail and said veteran entrepreneurs needed aligned training, peer networks, and streamlined paths into both government and corporate supply chains.

• Rep. Dan Meuser asked why TAP was “broken” and how it should be fixed. Mr. Schmiegel replied that TAP tried to jam information into a five-day course for a distracted audience and instead should start by helping service members ask fundamental questions about purpose, community, health, and ongoing self-improvement rather than just pushing benefits and employment.

• Rep. Meuser asked if the SBA and VA departments were adequately supported. Mr. Schmiegel said programs were generally funded but that more of those funds should be redirected to access to capital for veteran small businesses.

• Rep. Meuser then asked about access to capital. Ms. Fox answered that 37 percent of veteran entrepreneurs reported capital as a barrier, often turned to personal savings, lacked early credit repair and knowledge of CDFIs, and struggled more with “readiness” than pure access. Mr. Lefebvre added that policy should also ensure continuity of capital across start-up, growth, and exit, including better tools than current SBA loan limits for veteran-to-veteran business transitions.

• Rep. LaMonica McIver asked the witnesses what standardized procedures TAP and SBA should adopt to help veterans translate military skills into viable business plans. Ms. Fox said TAP needed “warm handoffs” into resource partners and incentivized referral networks so transitioning service members were guided into trusted support rather than left to navigate alone. Mr. Schmiegel argued that veteran small business owners themselves needed more access to installations and TAP classrooms, noting that big nonprofits and companies dominated base access while veteran entrepreneurs were often expected to “pay to play,” and he urged giving veterans like those on the panel greater opportunities to mentor and tell their stories. Mr. Lefebvre added that Boots to Business and entrepreneurship modules were delivered inconsistently across locations and deployment scenarios and suggested introducing entrepreneurship earlier in service. Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner underscored the importance of mentorship and making sure separating veterans knew entrepreneurship was a real option with multiple pathways.

• Rep. Mark Alford asked why veteran entrepreneurship had dropped from roughly half of returning veterans after World War II and Korea to just over 4 percent today. Mr. Schmiegel said the problem stemmed from the same organizations repeating the same agendas while policy and hearings stayed focused on veteran unemployment rather than on building pathways into small business ownership and giving veteran entrepreneurs a seat at the table in VA and SBA oversight.

• Rep. Alford asked what the federal government could do better. Mr. Schmiegel urged a return to an empowering approach like the post–World War II GI Bill, with more investment and access to capital for veteran business owners rather than primarily benefits and traditional employment.

• Rep. Alford asked for an explanation of the “readiness” issue. Ms. Fox explained that veterans are turned down for capital at higher rates, are less likely to reapply after denial, often lack mentors and networks, and therefore need more transparent, connected systems that help them understand and navigate financing rather than simply being blocked by it.

• Rep. Gil Cisneros criticized SBA’s absence and lack of responsiveness on contracting questions and asked if any witnesses knew how many veteran or service-disabled veteran small businesses lost federal contracts in 2025. Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner replied that she believed more than 900 firms had lost contracts.

• Rep. Cisneros then asked why raising sole-source thresholds across SBA programs mattered, and Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner said higher thresholds would let capable veteran firms secure more opportunities, grow beyond “one-off” awards, and compete with larger corporations for meaningful, repeat contracts.

• Rep. Cisneros asked about the impact of SBA’s decision to leave the Los Angeles area. Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner warned that pulling SBA support away from 35,000 veteran-owned businesses in Los Angeles would be devastating because it would muzzle the community by removing guidance on how to find and win federal opportunities.

• Rep. Tony Wied asked how federal programs could be reoriented to better address veterans’ needs, including in Wisconsin. Mr. Schmiegel replied that nonprofits should be seen as “for-purpose businesses” and not the sole answer, argued that government should not be the main funder of nonprofit solutions, and said the real answer lay in veteran small business owners who were building “military thriving community” playbooks and toolkits at the local level. Mr. Lefebvre partly disagreed, saying there should not be a single point of failure and that federal programs could be effective if Congress defined outcome-based metrics, linked existing programs, and focused on connecting and streamlining rather than adding new layers.

• Rep. Wied pressed for concrete Congressional actions. Mr. Lefebvre recommended a structured study to map gaps, goals, and handoffs, while Mr. Schmiegel countered that policymakers had studied the problem enough and now needed to include veteran small business owners directly in decisions rather than commissioning new government-funded studies.

• Rep. Kelly Morrison asked for a description of the witnesses’ transitions from military service to nonprofit or private-sector work and to identify helpful or missing resources. Mr. Lefebvre said TAP had been a check-the-box gate that provided little meaningful support beyond benefits information and that the main failure remained the lack of mandatory handoffs to follow-on programs after TAP ended. Mr. Schmiegel said TAP had done nothing to encourage entrepreneurship when he left the Marine Corps at age 42 and that, had he known then what he knew now, he would have started even more businesses; he argued that careerist officers and senior enlisted at war colleges and career schools should be targeted as future entrepreneurs and as mentors who can guide young enlisted members toward business ownership.

• Rep. Morrison then asked about contract bundling. Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner explained that consolidating contracts into larger bundles made them inaccessible to the majority of veteran-owned firms with under $1 million in revenue, so she urged “bite-size” contracts that could serve as stepping stones for small veteran businesses to grow to multi-million-dollar levels.

• Rep. Rob Bresnahan asked for specific examples of how SBA and Congress could ensure veterans are “seen and heard” as they move into entrepreneurship. Mr. Schmiegel responded that veteran small business owners lacked access both in policymaking forums where big nonprofits and corporations dominated witness lists, and on installations and TAP classes, where they rarely had opportunities to influence transitioning service members compared to the “big players.”

• Rep. Bresnahan then asked about recurring mental health trends among veterans entering entrepreneurship, and Ms. Fox said that veterans who went through programs like the CEO Circle and EBV generally reported higher wellness due to expanded networks and “cheerleaders.” Ms. Fox emphasized that her institute tracked connections and well-being through data and found that peer networks and connectivity were central to veterans’ mental health and entrepreneurial resilience.

• Rep. Johnny Olszewski asked how veteran entrepreneurship support could be integrated with other veteran services to create a holistic system. Mr. Schmiegel described his work on “military thriving communities,” arguing that states and localities should move beyond just calling themselves “military friendly.” He said modeling such thriving communities and measuring how many service members stayed after transition would let one state “win the war for talent” and become a national example. Ms. Fox added that 82 percent of entrepreneurs still started businesses because of opportunity, and she described military entrepreneurship forums and a member council designed to connect nonprofits, corporations, and veteran entrepreneurs to improve policy, connectivity, and collaboration, while Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner stressed that collaboration across groups and across the lifecycle from transition to succession planning was essential for veteran businesses to thrive.

• Rep. Brian Jack asked whether entrepreneurship opportunities should be communicated more clearly as a benefit in military recruitment efforts. Mr. Schmiegel affirmed, arguing that the “broken veteran” narrative had damaged propensity to serve and that DoD and society should instead highlight veteran small business success stories to show that service leads to positive, entrepreneurial outcomes.

• Rep. Jack then asked what additional training or education they wished service members received while in uniform to ease the transition to business ownership. Ms. Fox said that leading with opportunity and building strong peer networks, as her CEO Circle program did, created jobs and capital while reducing burdens from regulations, and Mr. Lefebvre added that he initially did not even know entrepreneurship was an option and that communication about how military skills translate to business needed to begin long before TAP.

• Rep. Herb Conaway described his SERVE Act, which would have GAO study credit access for veteran and reservist small business owners and require an interagency task force action plan

• Rep. Conaway asked about unique capital-access issues for veterans. Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner replied that even successful veteran firms often struggled to secure capital when they needed it to pursue new contracts, citing an example of a $42 million company whose owner had to make multiple attempts to obtain financing despite a strong repayment track record. Ms. Fox said that over a third of entrepreneurs reported difficulty accessing capital and that more than half needed more tailored financial products as they grew, arguing that “capital readiness” required early credit repair, better navigation, and earlier integration into transition. Mr. Schmiegel urged Congress to examine why veterans owned franchises at twice the rate of civilians while overall veteran small business ownership was crashing, pointing to franchisors like Neighborly that offered better access to capital and using that contrast to argue for supporting franchising models and succession pathways from older veteran owners to younger veterans.

• Rep. Troy Downing, drawing on his experience as a veteran entrepreneur, asked why veterans had become less likely than civilians to own small businesses. Mr. Schmiegel said the post–World War II GI Bill had explicitly empowered veterans with low-interest business loans, whereas the modern GI Bill focused more on entitlements like education and traditional employment, offering few mechanisms for veterans to use those benefits for entrepreneurship education, training, and capital.

• Rep. Downing then asked what factors contributed to the decline, and Mr. Lefebvre pointed to the sheer complexity of today’s entrepreneurial ecosystem and the lack of clear roadmaps or SOP-like processes for service members used to highly structured environments, noting that uncertainty in civilian life felt even more daunting than combat uncertainty.

• Rep. Downing asked for an assessment of SBA outreach, and Ms. Fox replied that the core challenge was connectivity—ensuring veterans actually knew about available resources and that ambassadors could guide them to the right supports.

• Rep. Maggie Goodlander asked whether anything in TAP had worked for the witnesses and whether they would help design needed reforms. Mr. Lefebvre said he had mainly benefited from learning about education benefits, and Mr. Schmiegel noted that TAP had evolved somewhat, including an executive TAP track, but argued that big nonprofits and GS-level officials still dominated the curriculum, closing rather than opening veterans’ apertures.

• Rep. Kimberlyn King-Hinds cited a 2023 report listing financial literacy, credit-building, limited networks, and weak SBA oversight as major barriers for veteran borrowers and asked for substantive policy fixes rather than diagnosis. Mr. Schmiegel emphasized generational service continuity and said he was focused on building actionable “military thriving community” models. Ms. Fox suggested creating veteran-specific underwriting guidance that recognized nontraditional income, teaching veterans when and where to seek different types of capital along the start-up and scale continuum, and improving education and networks so a single denial would not shut down entrepreneurial aspirations. Mr. Lefebvre pointed to provisions in the Veterans Entrepreneurship Empowerment Act, such as waiving SBA guarantee fees on smaller loans, lowering equity injection requirements, and improving data transparency, and stressed early financial literacy while veterans were still on active duty. Ms. Aguilera-Gardiner agreed, adding that pathways to credit repair were essential to prevent veterans from falling into predatory, high-interest nontraditional loans.

SPECIAL TOPICS

JOIN THE NIMITZ NETWORK!

Enjoying our updates? Don’t keep it to yourself — forward this email to friends or colleagues who’d love to stay informed. They can subscribe here to become part of our growing community.