On Thursday the Senate voted 95-0 in favor of legislation that would provide employers with tax credits for hiring long-term unemployed and wounded veterans. These benefits were approved as an amendment (S. Amdt. 927) (pdf) to the 3% Withholding Repeal and Job Creation Act (H.R. 674) that the House of Representatives cleared in October. Introduced by Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT), the VOW to Hire Heroes Act of 2011 amendment would provide employers with a “Returning Heroes” tax credit of up to $5,600 for hiring veterans who have been unemployed for at least six months, a $2,400 credit for hiring veterans who have been unemployed for more than four weeks, but less than six months, and a credit of up to $9,600 that would increase the existing Wounded Warriors Tax Credit for employers that hire veterans with service-connected disabilities who have been unemployed for at least six months. These credits were initially included in President Obama’s more comprehensive job stimulus bill, the American Jobs Act (S. 1660), which stalled in the Senate last month. The Senate agreed to include the VOW to Hire Heroes amendment to H.R. 674 by a vote of 94-1 before passing the entire measure.
Tags: Employment Taxes, VOW to Hire Heroes Act, Veterans Tax Credit, Employee Benefits
A new tidal wave of employment laws is about to flood the shores of California. On January 1, 2012, multiple new laws will take effect in California, and they will have a significant impact on the employment practices of companies with California operations.
Tags: employees, California, California Labor Code, Employee Benefits, employee bonus, employee gifts, computer professionals, HR Allen Consulting Services, Human Resource, Discrimination in the Workplace, discrimination, Employers, Federal Contractors, Human Resources, California Employment laws 2012, New CA Employment Laws 2012, New California Employment Laws 2012
The previous blog covered several of the most important new employment laws for 2012 that could affect your day-to-day operations. Today's blog discusses additional employment related legislation for 2012 that may affect your business, including Workers' Compensation Legislation. Many of the new laws discussed in this edition relate to specific industries.
Tags: employees, California, California Labor Code, Employee Benefits, employee bonus, employee gifts, computer professionals, HR Allen Consulting Services, Human Resource, Discrimination in the Workplace, discrimination, Employers, Federal Contractors, Human Resources, California Employment laws 2012, New CA Employment Laws 2012, New California Employment Laws 2012
Tags: Agency Rulemaking, Investment Advice Rule, Uncategorized, Employee Benefits
Tags: ERISA, Agency Rulemaking, Prohibited Transaction Exemption, Uncategorized, Employee Benefits
The Small Business Jobs Act removed cell phones from the definition of listed property beginning January 1, 2010, meaning they no longer required heightened levels of substantiation to qualify as a business expense. However, Congress had not altered the use of an employer-provided cell phone as a fringe benefit. As a result, the value of employer-provided cell phones was still subject to inclusion in an employees wages unless a specific exclusion applied.
In Notice 2011-72 the IRS observed that [m]any employers provide their employees with cell phones primarily for noncompensatory?business reasons. Accepting what is a common business reality today, the IRS announced that if an employer provides an employee with a cell phone primarily for noncompensatory business purposes, the cell phone will be treated as a working condition fringe benefit and the value of the cell phone usage will be excluded from the employees wages.
The IRS explained that noncompensatory business purposes can include the employers need to contact the employee at all times for work-related emergencies, the employers requirement that the employee be available to speak with clients at times when the employee is away from the office, and the employees need to speak with clients located in other time zones at times outside of the employees normal work day. It added that providing cell phones to promote the morale or good will of an employee, to attract a prospective employee or as a means of furnishing additional compensation to an employee do not qualify as being primarily for noncompensatory business purposes.
In addition to the business use of a cell phone, the IRS also announced that it will treat the value of any personal use of such a cell phone as a nontaxable?de minimis fringe benefit. Therefore, personal use will also be excluded if the business use of the phone is for noncompensatory business purposes.
These new administrative rules are effective for periods beginning January 1, 2010. They apply to both employer-provided cell phones, as well as reimbursement of employee-owned cell phones.
In light of these changes, employers should consider reviewing their cell phone policies. Many policies prohibited any personal use of employer-provided cell phones. Companies may want to reconsider those policies in light of the IRS new guidance. Employers should also ensure that any employer-provided cell phone or reimbursement is for a noncompensatory?business purpose and is not merely to promote morale, attract employees or to add to an employees compensation.
By: William Weissman
Tags: Agency Happenings, Employer-Provided Cell Phones, IRS Notice 2011-72, Uncategorized, Employee Benefits
Generally, a plan administrator may provide electronic disclosures only to employees that ordinarily have access to computers i.e., using computers is an integral part of their duties and/or if the employee, retiree or beneficiary has provided consent to receive such disclosures electronically. However, as outlined in the Technical Release, disclosures that are not included in a pension benefit statement can only be furnished electronically if the following six conditions are met:
- Recipients must voluntarily provide plan sponsors, administrators, or their employers with an email address;
- Along with a request for an email address, participants and beneficiaries must be provided with a clear and conspicuous Initial Notice that contains:
- A statement explaining that providing an email address for disclosure purposes is voluntary, and that as the result of providing the email address, the required disclosures will be made electronically;
- Identification or a brief description of the information that will be furnished electronically and how it can be accessed by participants and beneficiaries;
- A statement that the participant or beneficiary has the right to request and obtain, free of charge, a paper copy of any of the information provided electronically and an explanation of how to exercise that right;
- A statement that the participant or beneficiary has the right, at any time, to opt out of receiving the section disclosure information electronically and an explanation of how to exercise that right; and
- An explanation of the procedure for updating the participants or beneficiarys e-mail address.
- The plan administrator must provide an Annual Notice to each such participant or beneficiary that contains much of the information provided in the Initial Notice;
- The plan administrator must take appropriate and necessary measures reasonably calculated to ensure that the individuals receive the information;
- The plan administrator must take appropriate and necessary measures reasonably calculated to ensure that the electronic delivery system protects the confidentiality of personal information; and
- The electronic notices must be written in a manner calculated to be understood by the average plan participant.
The guidance also contains a special transition provision aimed at employers/plan sponsors who already have participants email addresses on file. In this instance, steps one and two will be deemed to have been satisfied, provided a special Transition Group Initial Notice is sent containing information specified in the Technical Release.
In a statement, EBSA?Assistant Secretary of Labor Phyllis C. Borzi said: This technical release responds to requests by some plan sponsors and service providers to expand the ability of ERISA plans to use modern electronic disclosure technologies to communicate with plan participants while ensuring that all workers will benefit from the increased transparency provided by our fee disclosure rule.
This interim policy will be in force until the EBSA issues further guidance on this topic.
by Ilyse Schuman
Tags: Agency Happenings, Technical Release 2011-03, Electronic Disclosure, Participant-Level Fee Disclosure Rule, Uncategorized, Employee Benefits
As discussed in the EEOC letter, which was written in response to a request for guidance on this issue, Title II of GINA does permit employers to gather genetic information about employees and their family members when it offers health or genetic services including wellness programs on a voluntary basis. The EEOC issued a final rule implementing the employment provisions of GINA in November 2010. As outlined in the rule and the discussion letter, prior consent to participate in a wellness program must be voluntary, knowing, and written. In addition, while individualized genetic information may be provided to the individual receiving the services and to his or her health or genetic service providers, genetic information may only be provided to the employer or other covered entity in aggregate form. The EEOC letter notes that the final rule states that employers may not offer financial inducements for employees to provide genetic information as part of a wellness program. However, the final rule provides that employers may offer a financial inducement for completing a health risk assessment that includes questions about genetic information so long as the employer identifies such questions and makes clear that the employee is not required to answer the questions about genetic information in order to receive the financial inducement.
The EEOC letter further explains that an employer may use the voluntarily-provided information about the employee to guide that individual into an appropriate disease management program, provided it opens the program up to all employees if the program includes financial incentives to participate or reach certain health-related outcomes. The EEOC letter declined to address the concern that an example used in the GINA Title II final rule to illustrate this point is at odds with the regulations implementing Title I of GINA, which restricts the use of genetic information by group health plans and health insurance issuers. The reason given in the letter for failing to explain the apparent inconsistency between the two regulations was that the EEOC is not responsible for enforcing Title I. However, the letter states that the Commissions goal in formulating its position on wellness program incentives and the examples cited was to be consistent with the Title I rules.
The Commission further declined to take a position on whether and to what extent Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) would permit an employer to offer financial incentives to participate in a wellness program that included disability-related inquiries or medical exams, but stated that it would take any comments on this issue under advisement.
Despite the guidance provided in the EEOC letter, much still remains unclear. In October 2010, the Department of Labors Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) issued guidance in the form of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) that discussed the interaction between GINAs restrictions and employer-provided group health plans and insurance providers. As previously discussed, this guidance outlines certain constraints placed on insurance plans and issuers in providing incentive-based wellness programs, which appear at odds with the provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that are designed to increase the use and effectiveness of employer-sponsored wellness programs. Specifically, the Affordable Care Act recognizes the value of incentive-based wellness programs by increasing the amount of the reward allowed under the current HIPAA regulations beginning in 2014. As reflected in the Affordable Care Act, incentive-based wellness programs can be an effective tool for employers seeking to reduce health care costs and improve the productivity of their workforce.
Given the complexity and apparent inconsistency of the federal statutes and rules governing wellness programs, employers are cautioned to consider all applicable legal requirements when designing their wellness program.
By: IIyse Schuman
Tags: GINA, health care, Agency Happenings, Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, Wellness Program, Uncategorized, Employee Benefits, Discrimination in the Workplace, EEOC