By NAPEO

Thirty-three states (including the Virgin Islands) have borrowed more than $48 billion from the Federal Unemployment Account, according to U.S. Department of Labor data released this week. In states with loan balances on January 1 of two consecutive years that have not repaid them by November 10 of the second year, employers are at risk of losing a portion of their state FUTA tax credits for that year. The credit is reduced by 0.30 percent for each year the loan remains outstanding beyond the second year of the loan. Twenty-four states will experience a FUTA tax credit reduction, assuming each has a loan balance on November 10, 2011.

by Joanne Deschenaux, J.D., SHRM senior legal editor

Speaking before a session of the Society for Human Resource Management’s Employment Law & Legislative Conference March 14, 2011, an unemployment insurance (UI) expert presented a bleak picture of UI costs across the country. The following sobering facts were revealed by Douglas Holmes, the president of UWC, a nationwide association that represents the interests of the business community on national unemployment insurance and workers’ compensation public policy issues:

1. State unemployment taxes increased as a percent of total wages on average by 34 percent from 2009 to 2010 and are expected to increase even more for 2011 and 2012.
2. Thirty-two states have outstanding federal loans of $43.6 billion. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) projects a peak in 2013 of up to 40 states and $65.2 billion.
3. Interest on loans is charged at the rate of just over 4 percent for 2011. Under federal law, the interest may not be repaid from the state UI taxes, so approximately $1.7 billion will have to be paid from other sources. Employers in 19 states will pay a special assessment to cover this cost (Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Wisconsin).
4. The first interest payment from states is due Sept. 30, 2011. Interest continues as long as loans are outstanding.
5. Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) increases in borrowing states have begun in Michigan, Indiana and South Carolina, and are projected in 24 states for 2011, costing more than $2 billion in additional FUTA taxes.
6. Spending on unemployment compensation is at an all-time high, jumping from approximately $31 billion in 2008 to $120 billion in 2009 and $160 billion in 2010.

Impact on HR

Going beyond the numbers, what does this mean for HR? “Congress will focus on this only when they have to,” Holmes said, noting that state and federal UI taxes will continue to rise, which will increase the cost of hiring. In addition, the increased duration of unemployment compensation will continue to be a disincentive to individuals deciding whether to actively seek and accept work available in the labor market, he noted.

Ronald Adler, the president of Laurdan Associates, a consulting firm in Potomac, Md., stressed that HR professionals “need to understand how much UI is costing their individual companies.” In addition to an increase in the cost of hiring, UI-related risks include increased administrative costs and reduced profitability, he said. In addition, UI activity may trigger an audit by the state UI agency as well as by federal agencies, including the Department of Labor, Internal Revenue Service or Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

So what can HR do?

Adler noted that the first step for HR should be to review and verify tax rate notices. Next, ensure that your classifications of employees and independent contractors are correct and ensure that you have properly reported wages—the correct amounts to the correct states, he added.

Next, Adler recommended that HR take steps to protect the company’s experience rating, which impacts the state taxes it must pay. In order to do this, HR professionals should make sure that all UI claims forms are timely and correctly completed. All incorrect determinations and decisions should be appealed. He further recommended that HR attend UI hearings. In addition, he said, HR should notify the state UI agency of rehires and of refusals of job offers.
HR professionals should also look at the broader picture, Adler suggested, and assess hiring procedures and performance management appraisals. Increased effectiveness in performing these tasks may reduce UI claims, he noted. In addition, HR should ensure proper and effective documentation of employment actions and review disciplinary and termination procedures.

And of utmost importance is the training of supervisors and managers, Adler emphasized.
Holmes made the following additional suggestions for HR professionals concerned with the rising costs of providing UI benefits:

• Work with SHRM and business advocacy groups to explain the impact of increasing payroll taxes on decisions to hire.
• Explain the practical impact of individuals staying on unemployment compensation for long periods—loss of job skills; disincentive to accept jobs that are open while claiming unemployment compensation.
• Manage UI claims costs by paying attention to benefit charges, refusals of work, overpayment and fraud.
• Work with state workforce agencies to identify opportunities for unemployed workers for on-the-job training, internships and customized training that may serve some of your needs while reducing unemployment claims.
• State and federal unemployment taxes will continue to increase over the next three years and remain at higher rates for at least 10 years on average, Holmes predicted, so this is not a problem that is going to ease anytime soon.

For more information, visit www.shrm.org

On March 2, 2010, the U.S. Senate passed H.R. 4691, the Temporary Extension Act of 2010 by a vote of 78-19.  This Senate action follows House passage of H.R. 4691 on February 25, 2010.  The President immediately signed this bill into law on March 2, 2010.

The Temporary Extension Act:

1. Extends the COBRA subsidy program that was enacted under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and
2. Extends unemployment benefits through April 5, 2010.

COBRA

The law’s COBRA provisions:

• Extend the eligibility period for the 15-month 65 percent premium subsidy to those involuntarily terminated from March 1 through March 31, 2010.

• Allow employees to receive the subsidy if they first lost group coverage due to a reduction in hours and then were terminated after enactment of the bill.

Unemployment Insurance

The law’s unemployment insurance benefit provisions:

• Extend the period during which individuals may file applications for Federal Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) from the current end date of February 28, 2010 to April 5, 2010 and the period during which individuals may claim and be paid EUC is extended from July 31, 2010 to September 4, 2010.
• Extend the period during which individuals may qualify for the Federal Additional Compensation (FAC), the extra $25 weekly benefit amount on state and federal unemployment compensation, from the current end date of February 28, 2010 to April 5, 2010 with weekly payment provided during the phase out period for weeks ending October 5, 2010 instead of August 31, 2010.
• Extend the period during which 100% federal reimbursement for weeks of regular federal extended benefit payments to April 5, 2010, with the state option to continue the extended period from July 31, 2010 to September 4, 2010.

Additional Extension

These “short-term” extensions of the COBRA subsidy and unemployment benefits are intended to give Congress more time to consider legislation to extend these programs through 2010.  Under H.R. 4213, a bill the Senate is currently debating, both the COBRA subsidy program and unemployment benefits would be extended through December 31, 2010.

by National Association of State Workforce Agencies

NASWA has released a survey of the state unemployment trust fund solvency and tax rates. The survey’s findings underscores the significant impact that the current economic recession is having on Unemployment Insurance (UI) costs for all employers.

A total of 24 states will increase their taxable wage base in 2010. Of these 24 states, seven states (AR, FL, IN, NH, TN, VT and WV) have enacted legislation to increase the state’s “taxable wage base,” the level of wages subject to a payroll tax on employers. The remaining 17 state programs (AK, HI, ID, IA, MN, MT, NV, NJ, NM, NC, ND, OK, OR, UT, VI, WA and WY) index their taxable wage bases to the state’s average wages and will automatically increase their taxable wage bases for 2010.

Of the 51 state programs surveyed, 28 states (AK, AL, AZ, CO, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, KS, MA, MD, ME, MN, MT, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NY, OH, OR, PA, PR, VA, VT, WI and WY) indicated the tax schedule in their state will see an increase in 2010 compared to 2009. The majority of these increases will be automatic; adjustments often triggered by low levels of reserve funds in the state accounts used to finance unemployment benefits. While it is normal for states to recalculate tax rates each year, the magnitude of these rate increases for most states is unusual.

In addition, ten states (CA, CT, DE, KY, MI, MO, NC, RI, SC and TN) indicated their tax rate schedules were already at the highest tier, which would prevent them from automatically increasing in 2010. Consequently, the state legislatures would need to enact changes in state laws – either increasing the tax rates by changing tax rate schedules or increasing the state taxable wage bases.

Six of the 51 state programs surveyed (AR, CA, CT, FL, HI and MA) indicated they will automatically increase their tax rates due to a solvency tax already in state law. The majority of these solvency taxes also activate when states’ trust fund balances fall below specified levels.

Of the 51 state programs surveyed, 35 states estimated the level of UI tax revenue collected in 2010 would surpass the level collected in 2009; with a median projected increase of 27.5%. The range of these projected increases was 2.5% to 600%.

More information can be found at www.workforceatm.org