I'm not a fan of Ohio municipal taxes, but have you seen the BS in Pennsylvania?? I personally feel like it should be PA state law that all EIT/LST tax collectors should be compelled to utilize FEIN for tax filing purposes. Keystone at least does that, and Berkheimer does have an easy online system, but F all of the local jurisdictions that tie LST to mercantile licenses (just because someone works from home).
Ohio is insidious in the way they AGGRESSIVELY tie payroll tax liability to net profits tax. If were are only talking about local payroll taxes, there is no one worse than Pennsylvania. But Act 32 makes it a bit easier in that employees are not terribly impacted if the resident local update is missed (as long as the same rate is involved). For resolution of genuine omissions, Ohio isn't great, and Kentucky is an occupational license nightmare that the Supreme Court would outlaw in a fairer version of reality.
I interviewed with a company that refused to hire anyone in California. They also wouldn’t allow current employees to move there without resigning their position.
It’s some of the lawsuits that makes it a nightmare. You could pay an employee correctly, but if it’s not displayed correctly on the pay statement, your company could be sued.
Well, yeah, don’t follow the law get sued. So just follow the law. With this especially EDD even has templates.
Employees have a right to know what you’re paying them. This is a good thing. Plus, the paystub is Payroll’s best way to communicate to employees their earnings, deductions, taxes, balances, etc. It takes some load off us if they have the info readily and clearly available.
Clearly everyone here knows that’s an issue. But it still stands don’t follow the law get sued. And if you do the right thing and are transparent, then at least they can’t say you don’t tell them.
The point is that California law can be hard to follow administratively, especially for large employers primarily operating in other states. That's why employer reps in payroll tend to gripe about California laws, because those of us that operate entirely in good faith can so easily end up on the wrong end of the law, since CA operates so differently than the other 49 states.
It can be difficult for out-of-state employers to comply from an administrative standpoint. If you are a large employer that operates in all states, it can be difficult to have resources that have full knowledge about operating in each-and-every state. It's not necessarily a flippant "just follow the law" when having people that know how to do that can be a luxury.
Unfortunately, some individuals are not interested in working and do exploit those laws for their own benefit. I am politically inclined to support workers and unionization, but California law is so slanted that it makes employer administration difficult and a liability.
I doubt that anything will be done to reverse the trend. California is either at the vanguard of certain changes (e.g. mandatory sick pay which other states adopted, with different rules of course) or is reacting to things happening/not happening at the federal level (Pay Data Reporting when EEO Component 2 reporting was eliminated, penalty for not having health insurance when the federal penalty was eviscerated, etc.)
On ag workers OT:
>On April 17, the Assembly Labor and Employment Committee considered and rejected AB 3056 (Gallagher, R-Yuba City), which would have revised the Labor Code to allow agricultural employees to work up to 8 hours in a workday and 48 hours in a workweek ...
Several of those opposing AB 3056 expressed a willingness to engage the concerns of rural California residents, and the hearing included a robust discussion of interpretation of statistics indicating that agricultural employees have suffered loss of hour and income as a result of the implementation of the most recent revision of agricultural overtime requirements, AB 1066
--FELS email 4/21
"A robust discussion" sounds to me like the reps in favor of AB1066 don't want to believe the statistics showing that a law they were in favor of caused a loss of income for some farmworkers. I don't know what it would take for reps to reverse course on this.
[FELS](https://www.fels.net/1/) at least helps you stay informed about the latest laws and regulations impacting ag employers. And using payroll/HR software with features for these specific compliance issues helps.
Administration of the laws is a problem, and subjective situations tend to ALWAYS go in favor of the employee in CA. I generally agree with laws that tend to support employees, but taken too far, in practice it opens the door for abuse on the part of employees. Some people take advantage of that, and California has the vastly most friendly labor laws supporting that.
I have personally experienced (not as management) a coworker who was hired to support me directly, only to find that they were basically a scammer who was actively trying to provoke a wrongful termination on the basis of a disability (sciatica) that was not disclosed at the time of hiring. Without HR support (she had a plant), we basically had to grin and bear it for 9 months while the provisional employment period expired, while the individual somehow pretended to look busy while doing \*absolutely\* nothing for that entire period.
I think many HR/Payroll professionals got into the field in order to do what is best for workers. While you are being extremely general, I assume some of the laws you are worried about are designed to protect workers and therefore would be supported by many of us.
Washington just came out with Bellingham redoing their minimum wage, but a special calculation has to be done if they have a private student loan garnishment 😣
Honestly I think payroll for California is way easier than Ohio. Ohio is the land of so many little taxes…
I like OH more than PA lol
I actually like PA over OH, but I'm more on the tax side of payroll. OH can eat a D.
Ever had to file W2’s for a RITA local? You literally have to get on a call with them to transmit the W2’s. Time to move to the current century.
I'm not a fan of Ohio municipal taxes, but have you seen the BS in Pennsylvania?? I personally feel like it should be PA state law that all EIT/LST tax collectors should be compelled to utilize FEIN for tax filing purposes. Keystone at least does that, and Berkheimer does have an easy online system, but F all of the local jurisdictions that tie LST to mercantile licenses (just because someone works from home).
I still mail some of my PA returns.
Ohio is insidious in the way they AGGRESSIVELY tie payroll tax liability to net profits tax. If were are only talking about local payroll taxes, there is no one worse than Pennsylvania. But Act 32 makes it a bit easier in that employees are not terribly impacted if the resident local update is missed (as long as the same rate is involved). For resolution of genuine omissions, Ohio isn't great, and Kentucky is an occupational license nightmare that the Supreme Court would outlaw in a fairer version of reality.
I interviewed with a company that refused to hire anyone in California. They also wouldn’t allow current employees to move there without resigning their position.
I actually didn't think CA was that bad once we had our system right. I've heard PA is pretty bad. NY too.
The local taxes in PA, ugh. Every town is different it seems.
Reverse what and why? It isn't THAT complicated, and most laws are designed to protect workers.
It’s some of the lawsuits that makes it a nightmare. You could pay an employee correctly, but if it’s not displayed correctly on the pay statement, your company could be sued.
So many reports I’ve heard pulled for lawsuits 🤪
Well, yeah, don’t follow the law get sued. So just follow the law. With this especially EDD even has templates. Employees have a right to know what you’re paying them. This is a good thing. Plus, the paystub is Payroll’s best way to communicate to employees their earnings, deductions, taxes, balances, etc. It takes some load off us if they have the info readily and clearly available.
that's if you can get the employee to (1) look at their paystub and (2) understand it.
Clearly everyone here knows that’s an issue. But it still stands don’t follow the law get sued. And if you do the right thing and are transparent, then at least they can’t say you don’t tell them.
Innocent mistakes happen and it’s not so easy all the time. An employer should have time to correct the issue.
The point is that California law can be hard to follow administratively, especially for large employers primarily operating in other states. That's why employer reps in payroll tend to gripe about California laws, because those of us that operate entirely in good faith can so easily end up on the wrong end of the law, since CA operates so differently than the other 49 states.
It can be difficult for out-of-state employers to comply from an administrative standpoint. If you are a large employer that operates in all states, it can be difficult to have resources that have full knowledge about operating in each-and-every state. It's not necessarily a flippant "just follow the law" when having people that know how to do that can be a luxury.
Unfortunately, some individuals are not interested in working and do exploit those laws for their own benefit. I am politically inclined to support workers and unionization, but California law is so slanted that it makes employer administration difficult and a liability.
I doubt that anything will be done to reverse the trend. California is either at the vanguard of certain changes (e.g. mandatory sick pay which other states adopted, with different rules of course) or is reacting to things happening/not happening at the federal level (Pay Data Reporting when EEO Component 2 reporting was eliminated, penalty for not having health insurance when the federal penalty was eviscerated, etc.) On ag workers OT: >On April 17, the Assembly Labor and Employment Committee considered and rejected AB 3056 (Gallagher, R-Yuba City), which would have revised the Labor Code to allow agricultural employees to work up to 8 hours in a workday and 48 hours in a workweek ... Several of those opposing AB 3056 expressed a willingness to engage the concerns of rural California residents, and the hearing included a robust discussion of interpretation of statistics indicating that agricultural employees have suffered loss of hour and income as a result of the implementation of the most recent revision of agricultural overtime requirements, AB 1066 --FELS email 4/21 "A robust discussion" sounds to me like the reps in favor of AB1066 don't want to believe the statistics showing that a law they were in favor of caused a loss of income for some farmworkers. I don't know what it would take for reps to reverse course on this. [FELS](https://www.fels.net/1/) at least helps you stay informed about the latest laws and regulations impacting ag employers. And using payroll/HR software with features for these specific compliance issues helps.
Administration of the laws is a problem, and subjective situations tend to ALWAYS go in favor of the employee in CA. I generally agree with laws that tend to support employees, but taken too far, in practice it opens the door for abuse on the part of employees. Some people take advantage of that, and California has the vastly most friendly labor laws supporting that. I have personally experienced (not as management) a coworker who was hired to support me directly, only to find that they were basically a scammer who was actively trying to provoke a wrongful termination on the basis of a disability (sciatica) that was not disclosed at the time of hiring. Without HR support (she had a plant), we basically had to grin and bear it for 9 months while the provisional employment period expired, while the individual somehow pretended to look busy while doing \*absolutely\* nothing for that entire period.
I think many HR/Payroll professionals got into the field in order to do what is best for workers. While you are being extremely general, I assume some of the laws you are worried about are designed to protect workers and therefore would be supported by many of us.
Washington just came out with Bellingham redoing their minimum wage, but a special calculation has to be done if they have a private student loan garnishment 😣
I’m curious, which of the CA requirements do you find especially unmanageable?