Lancaster Law Blog : Lancaster PA Lawyer & Attorney : Russell Krafft & Gruber Law Firm : Pennsylvania : Lancaster's Legal Link

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The COBRA subsidy, originally outlined in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and subsequently extended, covered involuntary terminations through February 28, 2010. Without another extension, employees involuntarily terminated beginning March 1 would not have been eligible to receive this COBRA premium assistance. 

Congress had been attempting to push back the extension one more month, but that bill was blocked by Senator Jim Bunning. However, Bunning yielded last Tuesday and the extension has now been officially pushed back until March 31, 2010. This will allow qualified individuals who are involuntarily terminated before that date to reduce their health plan costs by 65% through the subsidy. A bill called the American Workers, State and Business Relief Act of 2010 includes a provision to extend the subsidy through year-end. We will continue to monitor this ever-changing situation, so please be sure to check back.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

We have had a number of inquiries and comments on our blog post regarding Act 4, the amendment to Pennsylvania's insurance company law relating to health insurance coverage for adult children up through and including age 29. Prior to Act 4, if an employer offered dependent coverage, insurance companies were only required to provide coverage to children on their parents' insurance until the age of 19. The Pennsylvania Insurance Department estimates that almost 40% of those who were uninsured in Pennsylvania are between the ages of 19 and 29. 

A key phrase of Act 4 provides that the insurer's obligation to provide coverage to a child of an insured employee beyond a specified age, up through and including the age of 29, is "at the option of the policyholder", meaning the employer.   Also, coverage would be provided at the insured employee's expense. Employees may wonder why an employer would not choose to provide this coverage and what the value is of legislation mandating insurers to offer coverage while giving employers the ability to opt out. In addition, if an employer is self-insured, Act 4 does not make any change in what coverage must be offered because it applies only to insurers.

While insurers may appreciate the opportunity to provide coverage to the group of young adults who are underserved, employers are not likely to be as supportive. It has been projected that the mandate would increase employees' contributions to their group health insurance, since insurance laws require additional costs to be spread among all employees, and not just those with adult children. This may result in overall health insurance premiums rising for employers and all employees. In addition, this effect could result in more employers becoming self insured to avoid legal mandates such as extended adult child coverage or Pennsylvania mini COBRA application requiring COBRA coverage for employers employing fewer than 20 employees.

You can visit the Pennsylvania Insurance Department's website for additional information regarding Act 4.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The tragic events recently suffered in Haiti have spurred millions of dollars in donations from American taxpayers to relief agencies devoted to helping earthquake victims. Through special legislation enacted on January 22, 2010, those taxpayers will generally be able to claim those deductions on their 2009 returns. It is hoped that the immediate benefit will spur even more current donations.

However, there are some limitations. 

• First, because donations to qualified charities are considered itemized deductions, the new provision will be unavailable to taxpayers who utilize the standard deduction. 
• Second, qualifying contributions are limited to cash and do not include property donations.  Qualifying  cash contributions can be made by text message, check, credit card or debit card. 
• Third, to qualify, donations must be made specifically for the relief of victims in areas affected by the January 12, 2010 earthquake in Haiti, and they must be made after January 11, 2010 and before March 1, 2010. 
• Fourth, the donations must be made to bona fide, qualified charities. The IRS maintains a database of such charities, but many churches and government agencies qualify even though they are not listed. 
• Please also note that donations to foreign organizations are generally not deductible. 

Finally, it is also important to keep a record of your donation. For donations by text message, the phone bill will suffice as long as the name of the charitable organization is listed.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The United States Department of Labor's Employee Benefits Security Administration released two new resource links on the COBRA Continuation coverage.

• Fact Sheet: COBRA Premium Reduction
• COBRA Premium Reduction Extension Provision

According to the United States Department of Labor (DOL) the FAQ and other information will be updated sometime this week. If you are interested in receiving immediate updates from the DOL, consider subscribing to their COBRA webpage. By subscribing you can receive notification when the site is updated with new information. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Legislation enacted by Congress and signed by President Obama on December 21, 2009, extends the ARRA COBRA premium reduction eligibility for two months, from December 31, 2009 to February 28, 2010, and increases the maximum period for receiving the subsidy to a total of 15 months instead of 9 months. 

With the new changes, the law provides that the 65% premium subsidy for COBRA continuation health benefits is available to individuals who are eligible for COBRA as a result of an involuntary termination between September 1, 2008 and February 28, 2010. The law previously required that both the involuntary termination and the eligibility for COBRA coverage occur before the last effective date of the subsidy, but now only the involuntary termination need take place on or before February 28, 2010, not the COBRA eligibility.

Last month, when we posted on the duration of the COBRA ARRA subsidy, we noted that legislation was introduced to extend the deadline for eligibility as well as the duration of the subsidy. The change enacted this month was not a result of passage of the October legislation but rather changes added to the Department of Defense 2010 Appropriations Act.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Internal Revenue Service has announced a new standard mileage rate for 2010, which is generally used to estimate the costs of operating an automobile for tax purposes. The new rate, effective January 1, 2010, is 50 cents per mile, down 5 cents from last year. In addition, the standard mileage rate for medical or moving and medical expenses has been lowered to 16.5 cents per mile, and the rate for charitable purposes remains at 14 cents per mile.

While there are generally no Pennsylvania laws requiring employers to use the IRS' rate, there may be some tax advantage for doing so. The IRS will deem employers who make qualifying reimbursements up to 50 cents per mile as meeting their accounting requirements, thus no income reporting or withholding is required for those reimbursements. However, employers need to make sure that their employees have provided adequate proof that the mileage was strictly for business use. Qualifying employees who are not reimbursed for their business mileage will be able to deduct 50 cents per mile on their individual tax returns.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

We have posted on the 65% COBRA subsidy several times since the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was enacted.  ARRA provided for a premium subsidy for COBRA continuation health benefits to "assistance eligible individuals."  Those individuals are defined as an employee or member of his/her family who is eligible for COBRA continuation coverage:

1)      at any time between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009

2)      elects COBRA coverage, and

3)      is eligible for COBRA as a result of an involuntary termination between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009. 

Some changes may be effected if the Extended COBRA Continuation Protection Act of 2009, H.R. 3930, introduced in the House of Representatives on October 26, 2009 and referred to Committees on Education and Labor, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means, is enacted.   

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I have compiled a record retention schedule to help guide my clients in determining when to dispose business records. Please note that this list serves only as a guide and special circumstances could alter any retention period given.

For more information on record retention check out our previous posts on record retention:

Record Retention in an Electronic World: Time to Clean House?

Developing a Record Retention Policy

Employment Record Retention/Destruction Policies: What not to do

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

If you thought that no one in Harrisburg was doing anything but wringing their hands about the Pennsylvania state budget for the last 3 months, think again! The Pennsylvania Senate and House of Representatives got together and signed Act 2 of 2009 on June 10, mandating continuing health insurance for employees of employers with fewer than 20 employees, effective July 10, 2009.

Since 1985, the federal Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) has required employers of 20 or more employees to provide its employees and eligible dependents continuing health insurance if they experience a qualifying event.

Under COBRA, employees or their dependents are required to pay the cost, up to 102% of the employer’s cost, to continue their health insurance. In February 2009, President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act providing for subsidized COBRA premiums for those employees who were involuntarily terminated after September 2008. Instead of 102%, the employees only pay 35%, and the employer fronts the remainder and receives a payroll tax credit for its payment. But this plan was available only to those who were subject to COBRA, not the smallest of employers. 

On July 10, 2009, when the Pennsylvania Mini-COBRA law becomes effective, the ARRA subsidy will apply to almost all employers in Pennsylvania. Currently, employers with fewer than 20 employees are not required to offer COBRA continuation coverage, leaving employees to shop for transitional policies which may not provide coverage for pre-existing conditions, prescriptions or maternity. Now employers who sponsor group medical insurance and have 2-19 employees will be required to offer employees and their dependents the opportunity to purchase up to nine months of continuation coverage on the employers group plan. 

While Pennsylvania’s Mini-COBRA is modeled after the federal COBRA law, there are some differences:

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On June 10, 2009 Governor Rendell signed Act 4 which amends the Insurance Company Law. Now insurers who provide coverage to children of employees must offer, at the policyholder's option and at the insured's expense, coverage for children up through and including the age of 29, provided that the child meets all of the following requirements:

    1.  Is not married.

    2.  Has no dependents.

3. Is a resident of Pennsylvania or is enrolled as a full time student at an   institution of higher education.

4.  Is not provided coverage under any other group or individual health insurance policy or entitled to benefits under any government health care benefits program, including under the Social Security Act.

This Act applies to new contracts and contract renewals occurring after December 7, 2009.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 July is probably my favorite month of the year for many reasons - lots of warm weather ahead, my birthday, my daughter's birthday and three whole weeks of the Tour de France. However, many home improvement contractors haven't been looking forward to the onset of July this year because the Pennsylvania Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act (the "Act") goes into effect today. I had previously written about whether a contracting business needs to register for the Act and how to ensure home improvement contracts are enforceable under the Act.

 In addition, this Act will have implications for how firms are rendering services. One of our clients took a proactive approach and sent emails to their entire customer base. This email explained that there was a provision in the Act stating that any contract subject to the Act (generally over $500) must include a provision that allows the homeowner to cancel the contract without penalty within three business days of signing. Essentially this provision could delay contractors from commencing home improvements for three days. Which could be problematic for customers looking for even a small project to be completed immediately.

However, this three day period is waived if the work requested falls into the emergency provisions of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. Those provisions allow the three day period to be waived by the customer if the home improvement services needed are " . . . a bona fide immediate personal emergency. . . ." In addition, the customer must provide a personal and signed statement in their own handwriting that describes the situation and acknowledges not only the need for an immediate remedy but also an express waiver of their right to cancel.

If a bona fide emergency does not exist, it is probably not a good idea to begin work until the three day period has run because the contractor runs the risk of the contract being cancelled during that time, which will likely prevent the contractor from being reimbursed for the work performed. It is also a good idea to contact the existing customer base and notify them of this new policy.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In his post on May 20, Matthew Grosh addressed the effect of the referendum lifting the alcohol sales ban in West Lampeter Township.  Yesterday morning an article in the Intelligencer Journal addressed some of the same issues. As there is a significant amount of local interest in this issue, I would like to provide some additional clarification regarding the process of obtaining a liquor license.

There are several types of liquor licenses available in Pennsylvania, including retail, specialty and hotel licenses. Many establishments that serve alcohol hold retail licenses, which are subject to Pennsylvania Liquor Code quota requirements. The Liquor Code limits the number of retail licenses to one per each 3,000 residents of a county. This quota often requires entities seeking to obtain a license to purchase an existing license and subsequently transfer it from the current owner. If the license is owned by an establishment in a different municipality, approval by the municipal governing body is required prior to approval by the PLCB. An inter-municipal transfer adds time and expense to the process of obtaining a liquor license.

Hotel liquor licenses are not subject to quota requirements. In order to obtain a hotel license, the licensee must meet criteria specific to hotels, including maintaining a certain number of guest rooms based on the population of the municipality. Representatives from Willow Valley have indicated that the resort will apply for a hotel liquor license. This allows Willow Valley to apply directly to the PLCB for the license, rather than having to purchase an existing license and request approval from the Township Board of Supervisors for the transfer of the license from a neighboring municipality. 

If Willow Valley begins the application process in the near future, it is very possible that it will be serving alcoholic beverages by this fall.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On May 19, 2009, voters in West Lampeter Township overturned a ban on alcohol sales that had been in effect for 74 years. While the referendum had primarily been sought by the owners of the Willow Valley Resort, alcohol sales will now be allowed in the entire Township. Does this mean that bars and beer distributors will start popping up all over the Township? Based on our experience in representing restaurants and other liquor license holders, we do not believe such a result will occur.

In Pennsylvania, in order for anyone to open a business that sells alcohol, they must obtain a liquor license from the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PA LCB). The process involves a detailed analysis of not only the owners and managers of the business in question, but also of the property in which sales are to take place. If those persons or premises do not meet the PA LCB standards, the license will not be approved.

Additionally, section 4-461 of the Pennsylvania Liquor Code generally puts a cap on the number of licenses issued in a particular county that is based on population, although there are exceptions for golf courses, bona fide hotels and other public venues. Because Lancaster County is usually at or near its cap, licenses will likely have to be purchased from another license holder, usually for a significant price. The license will then have to be transferred into the Township, which will be subject to the PA LCB's approval and the Township's zoning ordinances.

There are also protections for people who live near a proposed location for alcohol sales. For example, certain eligible individuals and institutions within a certain proximity to the location of the intended bar or restaurant can file a protest with the PA LCB. 

Realistically, it is likely that a limited number of restaurants, either existing or new, will be able to meet the standards and afford the costs described above and obtain licenses. There may even be a new beer distributor or two. However, for the reasons discussed above, a flood of bars is unlikely.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In a previous post, I described the new Pennsylvania Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act (the "Act"), which takes effect on July 1, 2009, and identified which types of contractors are required to register. If the Act applies to you, it is important that the contracts you enter into for home improvement work conform with the Act's requirements. A failure to do so will generally prevent you from being able to enforce the contract if your client fails to pay.

In order to comply with the Act, contracts must:

• be legibly written and contain the registration number of the contractor along with the Bureau of Consumer Protection's toll free number, which currently is (888) 520-6680;
• be signed by the contractor and the homeowner or their respective agents;
• lay out the entire agreement related to the work to be performed and include copies of all required notices and special clauses;
• include the date the contract is entered into and the approximate starting and completion dates;
• contain the name, address (no PO boxes) and telephone number of the contractor and any subcontractors known at the date of signing the contract;
• describe the work to be performed, the materials to be used, and provide specifications that cannot be changed without a written change order signed by the parties;
• include the total sales price due under the contract, along with any down payments and amounts advanced for the purchase of special order materials;
•  identify the current amount of insurance coverage maintained by contractor with minimum amounts of $50,000 each for personal injury liability and property damage; and
• provide owner with a "right of rescission" which allows the homeowner to rescind the contract within three business days of signing without penalty.

However, even if all of the above conditions are met, a contract will be generally voidable under the Act if it contains any of the following clauses:

• hold contractor or subcontractors harmless in matters of liability;
• waivers of government health, life, safety or building code requirements;
• confession of judgment;
•  waiver of right to jury trial or any rights under the Act by homeowner;
•  an assignment of or order for the payment of wages or other compensation for services;
•  any clause prohibiting homeowners from asserting any claim or defense they would otherwise have under the contracts;
• any award of attorney fees or legal costs to contractor;
• any provisions relieving contractor of liability connected to contractor's collection of payments or repossession of goods;

Also, a contract cannot contain an automatic or recurring renewal provision unless the contract clearly and conspicuously states a procedure through which a homeowner can cancel the renewal through written notice to contractor via first class mail that is postmarked at least three business days before the renewal is to occur. In addition, the contractor must notify, via mail, the homeowner of such right to cancel the renewal no earlier than 20 days nor late than 10 days before the renewal.

Further, an arbitration clause may be attached as an addendum, but it must strictly adhere to the form required under the Act. Finally, a fully executed copy of the contract must be provided to the homeowner on the day of signing. Please let us know if we can help if you have any questions regarding your contracts or the Act in general. Also, for more information, please see the PA Attorney General's list of related FAQs or the Building Industry Association of Lancaster County's information page.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I recently received a question from a reader that may be of interest to others. Following is a portion of the question and my response:

I read your article on COBRA it was very informative, Could you please tell me where I can get an answer to this question. I was laid off from my job in February. I am getting COBRA under the ARRA where my former employer pays 65% of my health benefits. I also am collecting unemployment.

My former company wants me to work a few weekend for them, will I loose my COBRA benefits if I do this.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) premium assistance subsidy ends not when you become employed but only when you become eligible for Medicare or another group health plan (such as a plan sponsored by a new employer or a spouse's employer). In fact the law imposes a duty on the recipient to notify the plan if they become eligible for coverage under another group health plan or Medicare, and failure to do so can result in a tax penalty. The subsidy will also end 9 months after the first day of the first month to which the subsidy applies or when COBRA benefits are no longer available to you. 

Generally, COBRA coverage is available for 18 months after termination of employment and may end earlier if: 

• Premiums are not paid on a timely basis

• The employer ceases to maintain any group health plan

• After the COBRA election, coverage is obtained with another employer group health plan that does not contain any exclusion or limitation with respect to any pre-existing condition of such beneficiary. However, if other group health coverage is obtained prior to the COBRA election, COBRA coverage may not be discontinued, even if the other coverage continues after the COBRA election.

• After the COBRA election, a beneficiary becomes entitled to Medicare benefits. However, if Medicare is obtained prior to COBRA election, COBRA coverage may not be discontinued, even if the other coverage continues after the COBRA election.

The COBRA statute provides that eligibility for coverage ends on the date that the individual first becomes covered under any other group health plan (as an employee or otherwise) which does not contain any exclusion or limitation with respect to any preexisting condition of such beneficiary. However, this year's ARRA provides that eligibility for subsidy ends the first date that the individual is eligible for coverage under any other group plan, coverage under a flexible spending arrangement or coverage of treatment furnished by the employer, without mention of any exclusion or limitation with respect to any pre-existing condition.

I hope this answers your question, which we thought was an interesting one.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A few years ago, Dateline NBC ran a piece with several horror stories from victims of unlicensed and unscrupulous home contractors. In some cases, unwary consumers shelled out more than $100,000 and faced foreclosure without work being performed. Because the contractors in question were typically not licensed, their victims could not track them down and obtain refunds. 

Such news is not just disconcerting to consumers. The majority of contractors who run their businesses in a conscientious and professional manner can be just as frustrated with such reports because it reflects poorly on them. 

The Pennsylvania Legislature has recently addressed this issue in enacting the new Pennsylvania Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act (the "Act"), which takes effect July 1, 2009. The Act requires home improvement contractors to register with the Attorney General and provide detailed information on the identities of their principals and the location of their offices. Such information in intended to be used to keep track of consumer complaints against individual contractors and to help consumers locate contractors to properly enforce contractual agreements.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Keeping accurate and updated records are essential for the health of your business. The following questions are provided as guidance when assessing the health of your business entity:

• Have initial filings been made?

Fictitious Name Registration, Articles of Incorporation, EIN/TIN Application, LLP Registration, LLC Certificate of Organization, Subchapter “S” Election

• Are all required filings up-to-date?

Fictitious Name Registration, Decennial Filing, Amendments to Articles of Incorporation, Annual LLP Registration, Change of Registered Address

• Do you have / do you need to update:

Fictitious Name Registration, Bylaws, Corporate/Shareholder Buy-Sell Agreements, Partnership Agreements, LLC Operating Agreements  

•  Are corporate records up-to-date?

Annual Shareholder Meeting Minutes, Directors Meeting Minutes

• Are your record keeping procedures accurate and adequate?         

Corporate Records, Business Records, Tax Records

• When was your last Shareholders meeting? Directors meeting?

• Are your legal and financial advisors aware of personal matters that could affect business concerns or visa versa?

• Are your bookkeeping procedures and records accurate, complete, consistent and reviewed?

• Do you have a Business Succession Plan? If yes, is it up to date?

• Are your Estate Planning Documents up-to-date? Adequate for your business and personal needs?

Remember an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Make sure your business is in good health.

Download: Business Wellness Checklist

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In tough economic times, businesses tend to focus on larger issues such as their bottom lines, falling profit projections, and the streamlining of production. However a key component in the health of a business is often overlooked – the effects that economically stressed employees can have on their employers. Such effects include personal bankruptcies, wage attachments, theft and a decline in productivity caused by the psychological stress. Thus it is essential for employers to understand the key factors at play and implement sound policies to minimize damage.

• Stress and Loss of Productivity   Like many other types of psychological stress, anxiety caused by economic problems prevents employees from focusing on their work. Simply put, employers are getting less production per dollar of wages or salary paid. While identifying those in need of psychological counseling will help, many businesses have had success providing economic counseling and education as well to make their employees more financially literate. Please click here for more detailed information from the Partnership for Workplace Mental Health on combating the effects of such stress.

Other issues that will arise more frequently in the coming months include:

• Garnishment/Attachment of Wages
• Employee Bankruptcy
• Worries about Temptation for Theft

We addressed these issues in a blog post in April 2008, when we still referred to the condition of our economy as only an “economic downturn” but the general principles still apply. Please review this post to learn more about legal limitations placed on employer actions with regard to an employee’s financial problems. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provides a COBRA subsidy for Employees who lost or will lose health insurance coverage under an employer-sponsored plan due to an involuntary termination of employment between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009. Many employers have no doubt that they are subject to these changes and are currently in the process of implementing updates. However, with the recent news about changes to COBRA, some small employers are asking themselves, do my employees qualify and am I required to provide COBRA continuation coverage? The good news is that the ARRA has not expanded the type of employer-provided plans subject to the Act, so if employers were not required to provide COBRA continuation coverage prior to the ARRA, they would not be required to do so now. 

COBRA continuation coverage applies to all private sector group health plans which are maintained by employers that have at least 20 employees on more than 50% of its typical business days in the previous calendar year. In determining the total number of employees, full and part-time employees are counted. However, each part-time employee counts as a fraction of a full-time employee. The fraction for a part-time employee equals the number of hours the part-time employee worked, divided by the hours an employee must work to be considered full-time. Therefore, if a private sector employer is offering a group health plan with at least 20 employees as calculated above, the employer must provide COBRA continuation coverage and will be required to abide by the new provisions in ARRA. COBRA continuation coverage also applies to state and local government-sponsored plans, but does not apply to plans sponsored by the federal government or by churches and church-related organizations. 

If you are not currently providing COBRA coverage but you think you may be nearing the threshold described above, it is imperative that you carefully review your 2008 employee census to determine if you are required to provide continuation coverage under COBRA.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

We received a question relating to employment in the economic downturn.  Is it legal in Pennsylvania to layoff an employee for lack of work, and a month later, replace that laid off employee with someone new.  I thought this would be a good topic to address in our blog. Generally, in the absence of a collective bargaining agreement or employment agreement providing for limitations on termination of employment, such an action on the part of an employer does not violate the law.

However, further inquiry can be made as to the true motive of the layoff.  Was the employee terminated because of his/her membership in a class protected under Pennsylvania and federal discrimination statutes?  Is she being replaced with someone not a member of the same protected class?  For example, replacement by an individual under the age of 40 can establish a preliminary claim for age discrimination if the employee replaced is over 40.

While the employer's proffered reason for termination, economic necessity, can appear to be pretextual if the employer is hiring a replacement soon after the layoff, the employer may have a logical reason for the new hire if it has secured new orders or new business.  And absent an agreement to the contrary, the employer has no obligation to recall laid off employees if business does turn around.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In March of 2008, a man in Wichita, Kansas left his home for several months to take care of his sick mother.  Unbeknownst to him, a married couple broke into the house, assumed his identity, and proceeded to purchase various luxury items, including flat screen televisions and a satellite hookup, while they took up residence as if it were their own home. They even invited neighbors over for dinner and took out a second mortgage in the real homeowners name.

It's clear that the specter of identity theft has grown quite prominent over the last decade. In order to protect the public from the likes of the home invaders described above, the federal government has enacted the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA).  FACTA affects how businesses should dispose of records or documents containing consumer information. Likewise, it will serve you well as a client to ensure that the business doing work for you follows the FACTA guidelines, or you could end up opening up a nasty credit card bill showing pricey purchase of Elvis memorabilia from QVC that you never authorized.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

So you've got your program all lined up - every new employee, regardless of job duties - signs a ten-year covenant not to compete with an unlimited geographical scope. No exceptions. Everyone knows the rules, so you are ready to go to court when Joe, whose sales territory was the Northeast United States, goes to work for your competitor in the mid-West. 

Not so fast. Nothing frustrates clients as much as being told that a court won't enforce an agreement that is clear and in black and white. But in order to be enforceable, a non-compete must be reasonably limited in duration and territory. The duration of the covenant cannot be longer than reasonably necessary to protect legitimate interests, such as customer goodwill, trade secrets or specialized training. For example, your agreement should be no longer than the time it will take a new hire to demonstrate his or her effectiveness to customers if the non-compete seeks to protect customer goodwill. Odds are that it is not ten years. In addition, the geographic scope needs to be limited to the territory covered by the employee during his or her employment in customer goodwill cases. Courts don't readily enforce multi-country restrictions against sales people with limited territories. 

Although there are many cases in which courts have reformed or rewritten an overly broad non-compete, if an employer is a real hog, the court will simply state that it will not rewrite a non-compete and refuse to enforce it at all. This was clearly the case in 1973 in Reading Aviation Service, Inc. v. Bertolet, when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said that they would not rewrite a non-compete that was unlimited in time and space. More recently, U.S. District Court Judge Stewart Dalzell in Fres-Co System USA, Inc. v. Bodell, reacted the same way and declined to reform an overly broad non-compete agreement stating that to do so would have sanctioned the employer's use of his excessive bargaining power to insist upon unreasonable and excessive restrictions upon its employee. The court stated that the non-compete's terms far exceeded what was reasonably necessary to protect plaintiff's business interests because employer's business was selling coffee packaging materials in the Southeastern United States and the Caribbean, whereas the non-compete spanned four industries on three continents. 

Many employers try to avoid this result by including a provision in the non-compete stating that should any portion or term of the non-compete be deemed unenforceable, the parties agree that the court should reform the agreement to one which is enforceable. However, the best practice is to include no terms in your non-compete that exceed what is reasonably necessary to protect your legitimate business interests. That analysis requires looking at each employee differently to determine what business interests would be jeopardized were there no restriction on his post-employment activities. Is it goodwill? Is it protection of trade secrets? What is the low end of the range of term of duration and geographic scope that will adequately protect you? Be honest and not overreaching, and you will be have a covenant that has a much greater chance of being enforced. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

So you finally did the right thing.   You converted your sole proprietorship to a single member Limited Liability Company so that you and your personal assets are protected from the liabilities of the business. Now you can sleep more soundly at night because your LLC is busy keeping your house, bed and pillow safe from evil creditors, right? If your LLC has employees, the Internal Revenue Service would say "not so fast - what about payroll taxes?"

Employers are generally obligated to withhold FICA and income taxes, the "payroll taxes", from an employee's wages and pass on those amounts to the federal government. Stiff penalties can result if those obligations are not met. Still, if your LLC is the employer, shouldn't those penalties apply to the LLC and not you personally? The IRS disagrees.

When you created your LLC, you were required to file a form with the IRS to obtain a tax identification number. To complete the form, you had to "check-the-box" to choose if the LLC will be taxed as a corporation, partnership or as a disregarded entity. Because you didn't want to be double-taxed on the business and personal level, you didn't choose to be taxed as a corporation, and because you are a single member LLC, you couldn't choose to be taxed as a partnership because there needs to be more than one partner. As a result, your single member LLC is categorized by the IRS as a disregarded entity for federal tax purposes.

This is where personal liability comes in. Through Notice 99-6, the IRS decided to hold owners of single member LLCs personally liable for payroll taxes. The rationale was that because single member LLCs are disregarded for federal tax purposes, they are ignored and the owner is the "employer" for federal tax purposes. While state law normally provides that LLC owners are not to be held personally responsible for their LLC's liabilities, the IRS trumps those laws with the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the United States Constitution.

However, there is some light at the end of the tunnel, but it's a good-news/bad-news scenarios. The good news is that on August 16, 2007, the IRS finalized new regulations stating, among other things, that they will no longer ignore single members LLCs for employment tax purposes. As a result, owners of single member LLCs will not be treated as employers for federal tax purposes. The bad news comes in two parts. First, the new regulations only begin to apply to employment taxes effective for periods beginning on or after January 1, 2009, so relief is not immediate. Second, owners of single member LLCs are still personally liable for the "Responsible Person Penalty" under Section 6672 of the Internal Revenue Code.

The "Responsible Person Penalty", also known as "trust-fund recovery penalty" and the "100-percent penalty" generally penalizes anyone who willfully fails to collect and pay over employee income tax and the employee portion of FICA taxes. The specific penalty is equal to the amount of tax not withheld and paid over. The liability of the "responsible party" is independent of the LLC's liability, and owners of single member LLCs are generally treated as "responsible parties." 

As a result, if you own a single member LLC with employees, it is very important for you to verify that your payroll taxes are being handled properly. If not, you could be putting yourself at risk.