The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming ABA Winter CLE Institutes:
ABA National Institutes
Learn and network at these live in-person seminars that draw lawyers from across the nation. January National Institutes include the 2013 E-Discovery and Information Governance, January 23-25 in Tampa, FL. February National Institutes include the 2013 Gaming Law Minefield, February 14-15 in Las Vegas, NV.
The National Law Review recently published an article by Jacob Mattinson, Diane M. Morgenthaler, and Ruth Wimer, Esq., CPA of McDermott Will & Emery titled, 2013 Expiring and Changing Employee Tax Provisions:
With the fiscal cliff approaching in 2013, several favorable tax provisions affecting individuals and businesses are set to expire. These changes include an expiration of the lower federal income tax rates implemented under President Bush, a return of the “marriage penalty” and an expiration of an extensive list of previously extended temporary tax provisions. Given this tax uncertainty, employers must prepare for possible changes to payroll taxes, flexible spending account contribution limits, adoption assistance benefits and educational assistance benefits.
The 2 percent payroll tax cut enjoyed in 2011 and 2012, which reduced the employee’s share of Social Security payroll taxes, will expire as of January 1, 2013. Specifically, this tax cut reduced the employee’s share of Social Security taxes from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent on the first $110,100 of wages in 2012. A similar reduction from 12.4 percent to 10.4 percent applied to the income of self-employed individuals. Although the increase is on employee contributions, the increase also affects an employer’s withholding obligations. Furthermore, if an employer provides a gross-up of any type to an employee, such gross-up will be commensurately more expensive beginning in 2013.
At the same time that the temporary 2 percent decrease in employee payroll taxes expires, a new 0.9 percent Medicare payroll tax increase applies (from 1.45 percent to 2.35 percent) under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Acton wages over $250,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly and $200,000 for single taxpayers. Self-employed individuals will have a similar increase in self-employment tax liability. Although this increased rate of tax is not an employer liability, employers must be prepared to withhold the additional 0.9 percent from wages for any employee with wages over $200,000. Because this withholding is required on an employee’s wages over $200,000, which does not particularly correlate with an employee’s ultimate tax liability, many employees, particularly those who are married, may find that they are over- or under-withheld, depending upon the earnings of their spouse. For example, if a husband and wife each earn $200,000, with joint wages totaling $400,000, this couple will be under-withheld because their respective employers will withhold nothing. However, the additional 0.9 percent tax for them is owed on combined wages over $250,000, resulting in an under-withholding of $1,350 ($150,000 times 0.9 percent).
The income tax exclusion for amounts paid by an employer under a qualified adoption assistance program is also set to expire on December 31, 2012. A qualified adoption assistance program allows an employer to reimburse an employee on a tax-free basis for as much as $12,650 in 2012 for expenses related to the adoption or attempted adoption of a child. Qualified adoption expenses include reasonable and necessary adoption fees, including court costs, attorney fees, traveling expenses (including amounts spent for meals and lodging while away from home) and other expenses directly related to the legal adoption of an eligible child.
Employee contributions to health care flexible spending accounts will be reduced to $2,500 per year for plan years beginning in 2013. Prior to 2013, the tax code did not limit health care flexible spending account contributions. This new limit must be documented in a flexible benefits plan by December 31, 2014, regardless of the fiscal year of the flexible benefits plan, and this change must be retroactive to the beginning of the 2013 plan year.
Certain reimbursements for employer-provided educational assistance will expire at the end of 2012. Section 127 of the Internal Revenue Code allows an employer to reimburse an employee on a tax-free basis up to $5,250 for certain educational expenses provided through a non-discriminatory educational assistance program, including reimbursements for graduate school and programs that allow the employee to qualify for a new position. Even if employer-provided educational assistance programs no longer have tax subsidies in 2013, employers can still provide some type of educational reimbursements in a more limited manner if the educational reimbursements qualify as a business expense and meet certain requirements, such as enhancing the employee’s performance but not qualifying the employee for a new position or career.
With the uncertainty of the approaching fiscal cliff, employers should consider advising employees of the ambiguity surrounding educational assistance and adoption assistance benefits for 2013 and the possibility of a 2 percent payroll tax increase. However, even if tax extensions for education assistance, adoption assistance and the 2 percent payroll tax increase are adopted in a new tax bill, employers should note that it is highly unlikely that either the new limits on health care flexible spending accounts or the new 0.9 percent payroll tax increase for high-income employees will be altered or eliminated.
© 2012 McDermott Will & Emery
The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming Global Financial Markets – Operational and Technical Changes for FACTA Compliance:
FATCA is amongst the biggest topics of debate in financial institutions across the globe. The effect that it will have on these institutions cannot be underestimated and its operational impact on the existing systems is set to be both time consuming and costly. The ability to successfully align all key stakeholders, including operations, technology, risk, legal and tax, will determine the ultimate cost of FATCA compliance. Moving on from mere interpretive matters, this GFMI conference will not only address key FATCA requirements but also discuss the practical impacts of IGAs and strategies for achieving operational and infrastructural efficiency.
The Operational and Technical Changes for FATCA Compliance Conference will be a two and half day, industry focused event, specific to Senior Executives working in Banks, Insurance and Asset Management Companies. Attendees will address key FATCA requirements, while discussing the practical implications of IGAs and strategies for achieving operational and infrastructural efficiency.
Key Themes of the Operational and Technical Changes for FATCA Compliance Conference Include:
1. Challenges of FATCA regulations and prospects for the final regulation
2. Achieving operational and infrastructural efficiency
3. Coordinating existing AML/KYC procedures with FATCA compliance
4. FATCA from the FFI’s perspective 5. Beyond banking: the challenges of FATCA implementation
6. Coping with the withholding obligation under FATCA
This is not a trade show; our conference series is targeted at a focused group of senior level executives to maintain an intimate atmosphere for the delegates and speakers. Since we are not a vendor driven conference, the higher level focus allows delegates to network with their industry peers.
If you own a business, the following are important items regarding the Affordable Care Act, sometimes referred to as Obamacare, you need to know:
By March 1, 2013, employers must notify employees of the health insurance exchanges, including the employee’s right to purchase health insurance through a state insurance exchange.
In 2014, pursuant to an Internal Revenue Code provision, employers with 50 or more full-time equivalent employees will be subject to the “employer shared responsibility” standards. Employers who anticipate having 50 or more full-time equivalent employees in 2014 need to understand the pay-or-play requirements so they can decide if they want to offer health insurance and, if so, what the insurance covers.
For employers with 50 or more full-time equivalent employees in 2014, penalties apply if no health insurance is offered, or health insurance is offered but it does not have minimum essential health benefit coverage, and an employee obtains subsidized health insurance coverage from the state insurance exchanges that are supposed to be in place by 2014.
Interestingly, in 2014, penalties can apply even if an employer with 50 or more full-time equivalent employees offers health insurance which has minimum essential health benefit coverage. This occurs if such minimal essential health benefit coverage is not affordable or does not offer minimum value, and one or more employees obtains subsidized health insurance coverage from the state insurance exchanges that are supposed to be in place by 2014. Coverage is considered affordable if it costs an employee less than 9.5 percent of the employee’s annual household income. Generally, an employer’s group health plan will be considered to provide minimum value if the employer pays on average at least 60 percent of health care expenses while the employee pays on average 40 percent of health care expenses (through deductibles and copayments).
In addition to the potential penalties under the pay or play provisions, the IRS Code includes a tax on any failure of a group plan to meet the code’s requirements for group health plans. For example, if an employer has a group health plan that fails to provide preventive health care services when a plan requires it, then the amount of the tax is $100 per employee for each day in the non-compliance period. This can be a very large tax.
©2002-2012 Fowler White Boggs P.A.
The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information about the upcoming Law Firm Marketing Boot Camp:
Have you ever gone to a seminar that left you feeling motivated, but you walked out with little more than a good feeling? Or taken a workshop that was great on style, but short on substance?
Ever been to an event that was nothing more than a “pitch fest” that left a bad taste in your mouth? We know exactly how you feel. We have all been to those kinds of events and we hate all those things too. Let me tell you right up front this is not a “pitch fest” where speaker after speaker gets up only trying to sell you something.
We have designed this 2 day intensive workshop to be content rich, loaded with practical content.
We are so confident you will love the Rainmaker Retreat that we offer a 100% unconditional money-back guarantee! At the end of the first day of the Rainmaker Retreat if you don’t believe you have already received your money’s worth, simply tell one of the staff, return your 70-page workbook and the CD set you received and we will issue you a 100% refund.
We understand making the decision to attend an intensive 2-day workshop is a tough decision. Not only do you have to take a day off work (all Rainmaker Retreats are offered only on a Friday-Saturday), but in many cases you have to travel to the event. As a business owner you want to be sure this is a worthwhile investment of your time and money.
Partners at Small Law Firms (less than 25 attorneys) Solo Practitioners and Of Counsel attorneys who are committed to growing their firm. Benefits you will receive:
Solo practitioners who need to find more clients fast on a shoe-string budget. In addition to all the above benefits, solo attorneys will receive these massive benefits:
Law Firm Business Managers and Internal Legal Marketing Staff who are either responsible for marketing the law firm or manage the team who handles the law firm’s marketing. In addition to all the above benefits, Law Firm Business Managers and Internal Legal Marketing Staff will also receive these benefits:
Of Counsel Attorneys who are paid on an “eat what you kill” basis. In addition to all the above benefits, Of Counsel attorneys will also receive these benefits:
Associates who are either looking to grow their book of new clients in the next 6-12 months or want to launch their own private practice. In addition to all the above benefits, Associates will also receive these benefits:
The National Law Review recently published an article, Lululemon and Calvin Klein Settle Yoga Pants Design Litigation, written by Susan Neuberger Weller of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.:
As we reported previously, Lululemon, an exercise apparel company, filed suit against Calvin Klein and its supplier G-III Apparel Group for infringement of three Lululemon design patents for yoga pants. On November 20, 2012, Lululemon filed a notice of voluntary dismissal in the Delaware proceeding based upon a settlement that would dismiss the suit with prejudice. The terms of the settlement are confidential, according to a Lululemon, which released a statement asserting that “Lululemon values its products and related IP rights and takes the necessary steps to protect its assets when we see attempts to mirror our products.” The lawsuit was somewhat unique in that it involved a designer seeking to assert IP protection in articles of clothing through patent rights.
©1994-2012 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
The National Law Review is pleased tobring you information regarding the upcoming 2nd Annual Canadian & Global Anti-Corruption Compliance Conference:
Event Focus
Given the escalating pressure from the global community for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) to strengthen their bribery and anti-corruption enforcement, it is key for any cross-border Canadian company to ensure full compliance with both Canadian and global laws.
The marcus evans 2nd Annual Canadian & Global Anti-Corruption Compliance Conference will build upon the inaugural through expanding on issues of Canadian and global anti-corruption enforcement.
By attending this second annual conference, delegates will be able to avoid the risk of fines and investigations through implementing critical bribery and anti-corruption internal controls as well as implement effective compliance programs and improve ongoing employee training. Attendees will walk away from this conference with an improved understanding of risk and how to streamline internal processes and procedures to ensure compliance within companies expanding business both in Canada and globally.
Attending This Conference Will Enable You To:
1. Review the regulatory environment and enforcement trends
2. Develop policies for internal controls for anti-corruption
3. Assess areas of risk within an organization
4. Deal with internal and governmental investigations
Industry leaders attending this conference will benefit from a dynamic presentation format consisting of workshops, panel discussions, and industry-specific case studies that provide accurate, real-world knowledge. Attendees will experience highly interactive conference sessions, 10-15 minutes of Q&A time after each presentation, 4+ hours of networking, and exclusive online access to materials post-event.
USCIS has released statistics collected from August 15, 2012, to November 15, 2012, regarding cases filed under President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative. According to the figures, a total of 298,834 DACA requests have been accepted for processing. Of those cases, 53,273 requests have already been approved, and 124,572 requests are currently being reviewed by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
The top 10 countries of origin for DACA applicants are: Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, Peru, South Korea, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and the Philippines.
The top 10 states in which DACA applicants reside are: California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, North Carolina, Arizona, New Jersey, Georgia and Virginia.
The statistics also indicate that USCIS received the most filings in September and October, and that filings decreased by more than 50 percent in November.
©2012 Greenberg Traurig, LLP
The National Law Review is pleased to bring you information regarding the upcoming FATCA Compliance Conference December 4-5, 2012 in New York City:
Implementing FATCA compliance standards will come with challenges for financial institutions across the globe. It is imperative that organizations and individuals, who oversee FATCA compliance regulations adequately prepare, understand and comply with the standards of the new regulations. The marcus evans FATCA Compliance Conference, December 4-5, 2012 in New York, NY will focus on the main concerns and issues with the upcoming compliance expectations under FATCA and analyze the existing requirements and how financial organizations can adequately comply.
Join industry leading experts, including key speakers:
Attending this premiere marcus evans conference will enable you to:
Attendees will benefit from a dynamic peer-to-peer presentation format consisting of workshops, interactive panel discussions and case studies. Each network and interactive session will be followed by 10-15 minutes of Q&A affording all in attendance an opportunity to get the answers to questions affecting their business. Moreover, 4+ hours of networking opportunities will supply attendees with benchmarking and best practices.
For more information, please contact Michele Westergaard at 312-540-3000 ext. 6625 or Michelew@marcusevansch.com.
For a full list speakers and topics, visit http://www.marcusevans-conferences-Northamerican.com/FATCA_NLRB
The National Law Review recently featured an article regarding Domain Names written by Tim Hyland of Ifrah Law:
The intersection of domain names and the First Amendment is not new. Indeed, in the early days of the domain name system, courts considered the issue of whether a domain name registrar could prohibit the registration of domain names on the basis of content – for instance, domain names containing profanities. See Nat’l A-1 Advertising, Inc. v. Network Solutions, Inc., 121 F. Supp. 2d 156 (D.N.H. 2000); Seven Words LLC v. Network Solutions, Inc., 260 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 2001). However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently was confronted, in Gibson v. Texas Dep’t of Insurance, with a new twist on the First Amendment as it applies to domain names: whether a particular domain name is pure “commercial speech” (entitled to only limited First Amendment protection) or “expressive speech” (entitled to more extensive protection).
The Texas Labor Code prohibits the use together of the words and phrases “Texas,” and “Workers Compensation,” or similar abbreviations. Nonetheless, Gibson, a workers compensation lawyer in Texas, registered the domain name texasworkerscomplaw.com. On the associated website, Gibson discusses matters relating to Texas workers compensation law and, of course, advertises his law practice. The Texas Department of Insurance took offense to Gibson’s domain name, and sent Gibson a cease and desist letter. Gibson, being a lawyer, sued in federal court, alleging that the Texas Labor Code restrictions violated his constitutional rights.
The Fifth Circuit, in an interesting opinion, addressed the commercial speech/pure speech dichotomy inherent in domain names used by commercial enterprises, but artfully dodged the question of whether the domain name was in fact commercial speech. Instead, the court first analyzed whether, if the domain name was in fact commercial speech (which can under some circumstances be restricted), it was the sort of commercial speech that the Texas Department of Insurance could restrict.
The court found, correctly, that commercial speech can be restricted only if it is “inherently likely to deceive.” The state argued that Gibson’s domain name implied a connection with or approval of the state. The Fifth Circuit dispensed with the state’s argument, noting that since there was nothing to suggest that texasworkerscomplaw.com could not be viewed in a non-deceptive fashion (a truism), the state could not restrict the use of the domain name as commercial speech.
There is a second exception allowing a restriction on commercial speech: A state may regulate non-deceptive commercial speech if the restriction “advances a substantial state interest” and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest. On this issue, the Fifth Circuit sent the case back to the federal district court to develop a factual record. It seems unlikely that the Texas Department of Insurance will prevail in the end, as the statute on which its objection is based is vastly overreaching, and would prohibit anyone providing services relating to workers compensation in Texas from registering domain names that accurately describe what they do. For instance, a physician who performs workers compensation examinations could not register texasworkerscompdoc.com (as of this writing, this domain name is available for the taking).
Obviously, such a domain name is not misleading, and there is no legitimate basis upon which the state can restrict it. Domain names are often a form of speech. Just because they are a relatively new format of expression does not change this fact and give the government a basis to attempt to restrict their use.
© 2012 Ifrah PLLC
