Publication of Unemployment Insurance Program Letters (UIPLs): UIPL 09-08-Immediate Deposit and Withdrawal Standards-Intercept of Refunds of Erroneous Employer Contributions; and UIPL 14-08-Treatment of Fees Collected by State Child Support Agencies, 32603-32604 [E8-12810]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 111 / Monday, June 9, 2008 / Notices
Signed in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of
June, 2008.
Brent R. Orrell,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Employment and
Training Administration.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Publication of Unemployment
Insurance Program Letters (UIPLs):
UIPL 09–08—Immediate Deposit and
Withdrawal Standards—Intercept of
Refunds of Erroneous Employer
Contributions; and UIPL 14–08—
Treatment of Fees Collected by State
Child Support Agencies
Employment and Training
Administration, Labor.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: The Employment and
Training Administration interprets
Federal law requirements pertaining to
unemployment compensation (UC).
These interpretations are issued in
Unemployment Insurance Program
Letters (UIPLs) to the State Workforce
Agencies. The UIPLs described below
are published in the Federal Register in
order to inform the public.
UIPL 09–08—Immediate Deposit and
Withdrawal Standards—Intercept of
Refunds of Erroneous Employer
Contributions
Recently, the question has arisen
whether refunds of erroneously paid
employer contributions may be
intercepted to pay liabilities the
employer owes the state rather than
directly refunding the employer. Many
state laws currently permit intercept of
state income tax refunds or lottery
winnings to pay other liabilities owed
the state. This UIPL is issued to inform
states of the Department’s interpretation
of Federal law requirements.
States are permitted to intercept the
refund rather than directly refund it to
the taxpayer.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
UIPL 14–08—Treatment of Fees
Collected by State Child Support
Agencies
States have long been required to
deduct and withhold certain child
support obligations from UC. In 2005,
Section 7310 of the Deficit Reduction
Act amended Federal law to mandate
that state child support agencies impose
an annual fee of $25 for collecting child
support obligations under certain
circumstances. In response to this
mandate, some states have chosen to
amend their laws and regulations. This
UIPL is issued to assist the states in
assuring that any such amendments are
consistent with Federal UC law.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Jun 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
Appendices
Appendix A
January 29, 2008
Advisory: Unemployment Insurance
Program Letter No. 9–08.
To: State Workforce Agencies.
From: Douglas F. Small, Deputy
Assistant Secretary.
Subject: Immediate Deposit and
Withdrawal Standards—Intercept of
Refunds of Erroneous Employer
Contributions.
1. Purpose. To provide guidance
regarding the Department of Labor’s
(Department’s) interpretation of Federal
law regarding the intercept of refunds of
erroneous employer contributions to
offset other employer liabilities to the
state.
2. References. Sections 3304(a)(4), and
3306(h) of the Federal Unemployment
Tax Act (FUTA); Section 303(a)(5), of
the Social Security Act (SSA);
Unemployment Insurance Program
Letter (UIPL) No. 45–89.
3. Background. Section 3304(a)(4),
FUTA, requires, as a condition of
employers in a state receiving credit
against the Federal unemployment tax,
that:
all money withdrawn from the
unemployment fund of the State shall be
used solely in the payment of unemployment
compensation, exclusive of expenses of
administration, and for refunds of sums
erroneously paid into such fund * * *
[Emphasis added.]
The same withdrawal standard is
found in Section 303(a)(5), SSA, as a
condition for a state to receive
administrative grants.
Recently, the question has arisen
whether refunds of erroneously paid
employer contributions may be
intercepted to pay liabilities the
employer owes the state rather than
directly refunded to the employer. Many
state laws currently permit intercept of
state income tax refunds or lottery
winnings to pay other liabilities owed
the state. This UIPL is issued to inform
states of the Department’s interpretation
of Federal law requirements.
4. Intercept of Refunds. Federal law
authorizes the state unemployment
compensation (UC) agency to ‘‘refund’’
the amounts erroneously paid by
employers into the state unemployment
fund. Federal law does not specify that
the refund must be made directly to the
employer. As a result, the state UC
agency may intercept the refund and
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32603
apply it to obligations the employer may
owe the state.
The Department notes that permitting
the UC program to participate in statewide intercept programs may enhance
the UC fund if the funds intercepted by
the state through other sources are
permitted to be used to satisfy past due
employer contributions to the
unemployment fund.
Unlike refunds of amounts
erroneously paid by employers, Federal
law requires the payment of
compensation to the individual whose
unemployment is being compensated.
Section 3306(h), FUTA, defines
compensation to mean ‘‘cash benefits
payable to individuals with respect to
their unemployment.’’ (Emphasis
added.) As explained in UIPL 45–89,
under the withdrawal standard:
all unemployment compensation must be
paid directly, as a matter of right, to the
individual whose unemployment is being
compensated, except for some narrowly
limited statutory exceptions. * * * To
deduct compensation to pay debts, or to
otherwise provide for payment to someone
other than the claimant personally, would
defeat the intent and purpose of the program.
Thus, Federal law requires a state to
limit withdrawals from its
unemployment fund to compensation
paid directly to the individual.
However, there are a number of
statutory exceptions, including one
permitting withdrawals to pay refunds
of sums erroneously paid into the fund.
This exception for refunds does not
require direct payment.
5. Action. State administrators should
distribute this advisory to appropriate
staff.
6. Inquiries. Questions should be
addressed to your Regional Office.
Appendix B
March 12, 2008
Advisory: Unemployment Insurance
Program Letter No. 14–08.
To: State Workforce Agencies.
From: Brent R. Orrell, Acting
Assistant Secretary.
Subject: Treatment of Fees Collected
by State Child Support Agencies.
1. Purpose. To provide guidance
regarding the application of Federal
unemployment compensation (UC) law
to the mandatory collection of fees
related to child support collection.
2. References. Sections 3304(a)(4) and
3306(h) of the Federal Unemployment
Tax Act (FUTA); Sections 303(e)(2),
454(6)(B)(ii), and 457(a)(3) of the Social
Security Act (SSA); Unemployment
Insurance Program Letter (UIPL) No. 45–
89; and Section 7310 of the Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA), Public
Law 109–171.
E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM
09JNN1
32604
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 111 / Monday, June 9, 2008 / Notices
3. Background. States have long been
required to deduct and withhold certain
child support obligations from UC. (See
Section (303)(e)(2), SSA, and UIPL No.
45–89.) In 2005, Section 7310 of the
DRA amended Federal law to mandate
that state child support agencies impose
an annual fee of $25 for collecting child
support obligations under certain
circumstances. In response to this
mandate, some states have chosen to
amend their laws and regulations. This
UIPL is issued to assist the states in
assuring that any such amendments are
consistent with Federal UC law.
4. Federal Law. Section 3304(a)(4),
FUTA, requires, as a condition for
employers in a state to receive credit
against the Federal tax, that state law
provide that—
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
All money withdrawn from the
unemployment fund of the State shall be
used solely in the payment of unemployment
compensation, exclusive of expenses of
administration, and for refunds of sums
erroneously paid into such fund. * * *
Section 303(a)(5), SSA, provides a
similar requirement as a condition for a
state to receive administrative grants.
These provisions, known as the
‘‘withdrawal standard,’’ mean that
money may only be withdrawn from the
unemployment fund for payment of
‘‘compensation,’’ with certain specified
exceptions. Section 3306(h), FUTA,
defines ‘‘compensation’’ as ‘‘cash
benefits payable to individuals with
respect to their unemployment.’’ One
exception to the withdrawal standard is
found in Section 303(e)(2)(A), SSA,
which requires a state UC agency to
‘‘deduct and withhold from any [UC]
otherwise payable to an individual
* * *’’ amounts to pay ‘‘child support
obligations’’ pursuant to part D of Title
IV of the SSA.
Section 7310 of the DRA added
Section 454(6)(B)(ii) to the SSA,
pertaining to state plans for child
support, to require that, for each case
where the custodial parent ‘‘has never
received’’ Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families, the state child support
agency is to ‘‘impose an annual fee of
$25 for each case in which services are
furnished, which shall be retained by
the State from support collected, * * *
paid by the individual applying for the
services, recovered from the absent
parent, or paid by the State out of its
own funds. * * *’’ (Emphasis added.)
The amendment also added Section
457(a)(3), SSA, to provide that ‘‘the
State shall distribute to the family the
portion of the amount so collected that
remains after withholding any fee.
* * *’’ (Emphasis added.) The DRA did
not amend Federal UC law.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Jun 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
5. Interpretation. Exceptions to the
withdrawal standard are narrowly
construed. Section 3 of UIPL No. 45–89
explained ‘‘that deductions may be
made only when authorized by Federal
law.’’ Paragraph 4.b of the UIPL added
that, with specified exceptions, state
law must provide that UC benefit
payments ‘‘be exempt from levy,
execution, attachment, order for the
payment of attorneys fees or court costs,
or any other remedy for the collection
of public or private debts, prior to
receipt by the claimant.’’ Therefore,
absent an explicit statutory
authorization, states may not deduct
and withhold a processing fee from UC.
Since the DRA did not amend Federal
UC law, states may not deduct and
withhold a processing fee from a
claimant’s UC when deducting child
support.
The DRA did, however, amend
Federal law to provide that ‘‘collected’’
child support obligations may be used
to pay the mandatory fee. As a result,
after the full amount of the child
support obligation has been deducted
from a claimant’s UC and sent to the
state child support agency, the child
support agency may, consistent with
Section 7310, DRA, withhold the
processing fee before sending the
balance of the child support collected to
the child support recipient.
States are reminded that, when
crafting legislation or regulations to
implement the provisions of the DRA,
care should be taken to ensure the
requirements of the withdrawal
standard, as interpreted in this UIPL, are
met. In short, a state law or regulation
may not authorize the payment of the
child support fee directly from UC, but
it may authorize the payment of the fee
from child support collected by the state
child support agency consistent with
Section 303(e)(2), SSA.
6. Action Required. State
administrators are requested to review
existing state law provisions and agency
practices involving the child support
intercept program to ensure consistency
with Federal UC law requirements.
[FR Doc. E8–12810 Filed 6–6–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE
CORPORATION
[MCC FR 08–06]
Notice of the June 17, 2008 Millennium
Challenge Corporation Board of
Directors Meeting; Sunshine Act
Meeting
Millennium Challenge
Corporation.
TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m. to 12 p.m.,
Tuesday, June 17, 2008.
PLACE: Department of State, 2201 C
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20520.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Information on the meeting may be
obtained from Suzi M. Morris via e-mail
at Board@mcc.gov or by telephone at
(202) 521–3600.
STATUS: Meeting will be closed to the
public.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Board
of Directors (the ‘‘Board’’) of the
Millennium Challenge Corporation
(‘‘MCC’’) will hold a meeting to discuss
and consider country-specific compact
development issues and compact
implementation issues affecting a
number of MCC’s countries; and certain
administrative matters.
The agenda items are expected to
involve the discussion of classified
information and the meeting will be
closed to the public.
AGENCY:
Dated: June 5, 2008.
William G. Anderson, Jr.,
Vice President and General Counsel,
Millennium Challenge Corporation.
[FR Doc. 08–1335 Filed 6–5–08; 12:53 pm]
BILLING CODE 9211–03–P
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS
ADMINISTRATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NARA is giving public notice
that the agency proposes to request
extension of a currently approved
information collection used by
individuals applying for a research card
which is needed to use original archival
records in a National Archives and
Records Administration facility. The
public is invited to comment on the
proposed information collection
pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995.
E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM
09JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 111 (Monday, June 9, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32603-32604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-12810]
[[Page 32603]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
Publication of Unemployment Insurance Program Letters (UIPLs):
UIPL 09-08--Immediate Deposit and Withdrawal Standards--Intercept of
Refunds of Erroneous Employer Contributions; and UIPL 14-08--Treatment
of Fees Collected by State Child Support Agencies
AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration interprets Federal
law requirements pertaining to unemployment compensation (UC). These
interpretations are issued in Unemployment Insurance Program Letters
(UIPLs) to the State Workforce Agencies. The UIPLs described below are
published in the Federal Register in order to inform the public.
UIPL 09-08--Immediate Deposit and Withdrawal Standards--Intercept of
Refunds of Erroneous Employer Contributions
Recently, the question has arisen whether refunds of erroneously
paid employer contributions may be intercepted to pay liabilities the
employer owes the state rather than directly refunding the employer.
Many state laws currently permit intercept of state income tax refunds
or lottery winnings to pay other liabilities owed the state. This UIPL
is issued to inform states of the Department's interpretation of
Federal law requirements.
States are permitted to intercept the refund rather than directly
refund it to the taxpayer.
UIPL 14-08--Treatment of Fees Collected by State Child Support Agencies
States have long been required to deduct and withhold certain child
support obligations from UC. In 2005, Section 7310 of the Deficit
Reduction Act amended Federal law to mandate that state child support
agencies impose an annual fee of $25 for collecting child support
obligations under certain circumstances. In response to this mandate,
some states have chosen to amend their laws and regulations. This UIPL
is issued to assist the states in assuring that any such amendments are
consistent with Federal UC law.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of June, 2008.
Brent R. Orrell,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Employment and Training Administration.
Appendices
Appendix A
January 29, 2008
Advisory: Unemployment Insurance Program Letter No. 9-08.
To: State Workforce Agencies.
From: Douglas F. Small, Deputy Assistant Secretary.
Subject: Immediate Deposit and Withdrawal Standards--Intercept of
Refunds of Erroneous Employer Contributions.
1. Purpose. To provide guidance regarding the Department of Labor's
(Department's) interpretation of Federal law regarding the intercept of
refunds of erroneous employer contributions to offset other employer
liabilities to the state.
2. References. Sections 3304(a)(4), and 3306(h) of the Federal
Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA); Section 303(a)(5), of the Social Security
Act (SSA); Unemployment Insurance Program Letter (UIPL) No. 45-89.
3. Background. Section 3304(a)(4), FUTA, requires, as a condition
of employers in a state receiving credit against the Federal
unemployment tax, that:
all money withdrawn from the unemployment fund of the State shall be
used solely in the payment of unemployment compensation, exclusive
of expenses of administration, and for refunds of sums erroneously
paid into such fund * * * [Emphasis added.]
The same withdrawal standard is found in Section 303(a)(5), SSA, as
a condition for a state to receive administrative grants.
Recently, the question has arisen whether refunds of erroneously
paid employer contributions may be intercepted to pay liabilities the
employer owes the state rather than directly refunded to the employer.
Many state laws currently permit intercept of state income tax refunds
or lottery winnings to pay other liabilities owed the state. This UIPL
is issued to inform states of the Department's interpretation of
Federal law requirements.
4. Intercept of Refunds. Federal law authorizes the state
unemployment compensation (UC) agency to ``refund'' the amounts
erroneously paid by employers into the state unemployment fund. Federal
law does not specify that the refund must be made directly to the
employer. As a result, the state UC agency may intercept the refund and
apply it to obligations the employer may owe the state.
The Department notes that permitting the UC program to participate
in state-wide intercept programs may enhance the UC fund if the funds
intercepted by the state through other sources are permitted to be used
to satisfy past due employer contributions to the unemployment fund.
Unlike refunds of amounts erroneously paid by employers, Federal
law requires the payment of compensation to the individual whose
unemployment is being compensated. Section 3306(h), FUTA, defines
compensation to mean ``cash benefits payable to individuals with
respect to their unemployment.'' (Emphasis added.) As explained in UIPL
45-89, under the withdrawal standard:
all unemployment compensation must be paid directly, as a matter of
right, to the individual whose unemployment is being compensated,
except for some narrowly limited statutory exceptions. * * * To
deduct compensation to pay debts, or to otherwise provide for
payment to someone other than the claimant personally, would defeat
the intent and purpose of the program.
Thus, Federal law requires a state to limit withdrawals from its
unemployment fund to compensation paid directly to the individual.
However, there are a number of statutory exceptions, including one
permitting withdrawals to pay refunds of sums erroneously paid into the
fund. This exception for refunds does not require direct payment.
5. Action. State administrators should distribute this advisory to
appropriate staff.
6. Inquiries. Questions should be addressed to your Regional
Office.
Appendix B
March 12, 2008
Advisory: Unemployment Insurance Program Letter No. 14-08.
To: State Workforce Agencies.
From: Brent R. Orrell, Acting Assistant Secretary.
Subject: Treatment of Fees Collected by State Child Support
Agencies.
1. Purpose. To provide guidance regarding the application of
Federal unemployment compensation (UC) law to the mandatory collection
of fees related to child support collection.
2. References. Sections 3304(a)(4) and 3306(h) of the Federal
Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA); Sections 303(e)(2), 454(6)(B)(ii), and
457(a)(3) of the Social Security Act (SSA); Unemployment Insurance
Program Letter (UIPL) No. 45-89; and Section 7310 of the Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA), Public Law 109-171.
[[Page 32604]]
3. Background. States have long been required to deduct and
withhold certain child support obligations from UC. (See Section
(303)(e)(2), SSA, and UIPL No. 45-89.) In 2005, Section 7310 of the DRA
amended Federal law to mandate that state child support agencies impose
an annual fee of $25 for collecting child support obligations under
certain circumstances. In response to this mandate, some states have
chosen to amend their laws and regulations. This UIPL is issued to
assist the states in assuring that any such amendments are consistent
with Federal UC law.
4. Federal Law. Section 3304(a)(4), FUTA, requires, as a condition
for employers in a state to receive credit against the Federal tax,
that state law provide that--
All money withdrawn from the unemployment fund of the State
shall be used solely in the payment of unemployment compensation,
exclusive of expenses of administration, and for refunds of sums
erroneously paid into such fund. * * *
Section 303(a)(5), SSA, provides a similar requirement as a
condition for a state to receive administrative grants. These
provisions, known as the ``withdrawal standard,'' mean that money may
only be withdrawn from the unemployment fund for payment of
``compensation,'' with certain specified exceptions. Section 3306(h),
FUTA, defines ``compensation'' as ``cash benefits payable to
individuals with respect to their unemployment.'' One exception to the
withdrawal standard is found in Section 303(e)(2)(A), SSA, which
requires a state UC agency to ``deduct and withhold from any [UC]
otherwise payable to an individual * * *'' amounts to pay ``child
support obligations'' pursuant to part D of Title IV of the SSA.
Section 7310 of the DRA added Section 454(6)(B)(ii) to the SSA,
pertaining to state plans for child support, to require that, for each
case where the custodial parent ``has never received'' Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families, the state child support agency is to
``impose an annual fee of $25 for each case in which services are
furnished, which shall be retained by the State from support collected,
* * * paid by the individual applying for the services, recovered from
the absent parent, or paid by the State out of its own funds. * * *''
(Emphasis added.) The amendment also added Section 457(a)(3), SSA, to
provide that ``the State shall distribute to the family the portion of
the amount so collected that remains after withholding any fee. * * *''
(Emphasis added.) The DRA did not amend Federal UC law.
5. Interpretation. Exceptions to the withdrawal standard are
narrowly construed. Section 3 of UIPL No. 45-89 explained ``that
deductions may be made only when authorized by Federal law.'' Paragraph
4.b of the UIPL added that, with specified exceptions, state law must
provide that UC benefit payments ``be exempt from levy, execution,
attachment, order for the payment of attorneys fees or court costs, or
any other remedy for the collection of public or private debts, prior
to receipt by the claimant.'' Therefore, absent an explicit statutory
authorization, states may not deduct and withhold a processing fee from
UC. Since the DRA did not amend Federal UC law, states may not deduct
and withhold a processing fee from a claimant's UC when deducting child
support.
The DRA did, however, amend Federal law to provide that
``collected'' child support obligations may be used to pay the
mandatory fee. As a result, after the full amount of the child support
obligation has been deducted from a claimant's UC and sent to the state
child support agency, the child support agency may, consistent with
Section 7310, DRA, withhold the processing fee before sending the
balance of the child support collected to the child support recipient.
States are reminded that, when crafting legislation or regulations
to implement the provisions of the DRA, care should be taken to ensure
the requirements of the withdrawal standard, as interpreted in this
UIPL, are met. In short, a state law or regulation may not authorize
the payment of the child support fee directly from UC, but it may
authorize the payment of the fee from child support collected by the
state child support agency consistent with Section 303(e)(2), SSA.
6. Action Required. State administrators are requested to review
existing state law provisions and agency practices involving the child
support intercept program to ensure consistency with Federal UC law
requirements.
[FR Doc. E8-12810 Filed 6-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
