<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: MDES reauthorization bill misses deadline</title>
	<atom:link href="http://msbusiness.com/blog/2010/03/11/mdes-reauthorization-bill-misses-deadline/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://msbusiness.com/blog/2010/03/11/mdes-reauthorization-bill-misses-deadline/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=mdes-reauthorization-bill-misses-deadline</link>
	<description>Mississippi Business Journal</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 20:04:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beverly</title>
		<link>http://msbusiness.com/blog/2010/03/11/mdes-reauthorization-bill-misses-deadline/#comment-17845</link>
		<dc:creator>Beverly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://msbusiness.com/?p=20483#comment-17845</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What is Haley Barbour refering to when he says employers will have to pay a higher tax on part-time employees once the stimulus dollars that provide 100% federal funding for emergency unemployment insurance run out? I thought the provision under the ARRA states that once the federal government no longer provides this funding there is a provision that all states revert back to their specific guidelines and rules.  My understanding is that it is only while the federal gov&#039;t is providing full reimbursement for this program that part-time workers, dislocated workers due to domestic abuse etc are required to be eligible for benefits. That once the program is no longer fully funded by the federal governemt a sunset clause allows states to revert back to the current state laws on the books.

Haley Barbour states &quot;when the stimulus dollars run out&quot; but in the case of the emergency unemployment being paid wholly with federal dollars, when the federal government phases out the EUC program then they no longer dictate how individuals in each state qualify for benefits.

So I guess my question is, in what way will federal emergency unemployment compensation cause taxes of MS employers to be raised. If the emergency funds are being paid for in total by the federal government and is not affecting claims against the business  or businesses that laid off these employees how does that constituent added future taxes on MS businesses?

Could someone please clear this up for me? I&#039;ve heard many times Governor Barbour make the higher taxes issue as an explanation for not accepting these funds but have yet to hear an explanation on how this would come about.

I was reading an article in a New York paper and it mentioned that Mississippi is not eligible for these additional unemployment benefits because Haley Barbour continues to playing political games. Again can anyone tell me what games are they refering to if this is indeed true.

Any input to enlighten me in this area would be helpful. I have not been able to get much information from local media outlets that explains the details of Haley Barbours refusal to accept these funds to benefit this state&#039;s unemployed worker.

Sincerely Beverly Johnson]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is Haley Barbour refering to when he says employers will have to pay a higher tax on part-time employees once the stimulus dollars that provide 100% federal funding for emergency unemployment insurance run out? I thought the provision under the ARRA states that once the federal government no longer provides this funding there is a provision that all states revert back to their specific guidelines and rules.  My understanding is that it is only while the federal gov&#8217;t is providing full reimbursement for this program that part-time workers, dislocated workers due to domestic abuse etc are required to be eligible for benefits. That once the program is no longer fully funded by the federal governemt a sunset clause allows states to revert back to the current state laws on the books.</p>
<p>Haley Barbour states &#8220;when the stimulus dollars run out&#8221; but in the case of the emergency unemployment being paid wholly with federal dollars, when the federal government phases out the EUC program then they no longer dictate how individuals in each state qualify for benefits.</p>
<p>So I guess my question is, in what way will federal emergency unemployment compensation cause taxes of MS employers to be raised. If the emergency funds are being paid for in total by the federal government and is not affecting claims against the business  or businesses that laid off these employees how does that constituent added future taxes on MS businesses?</p>
<p>Could someone please clear this up for me? I&#8217;ve heard many times Governor Barbour make the higher taxes issue as an explanation for not accepting these funds but have yet to hear an explanation on how this would come about.</p>
<p>I was reading an article in a New York paper and it mentioned that Mississippi is not eligible for these additional unemployment benefits because Haley Barbour continues to playing political games. Again can anyone tell me what games are they refering to if this is indeed true.</p>
<p>Any input to enlighten me in this area would be helpful. I have not been able to get much information from local media outlets that explains the details of Haley Barbours refusal to accept these funds to benefit this state&#8217;s unemployed worker.</p>
<p>Sincerely Beverly Johnson</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MDES reauthorization bill misses deadline &#124; Insurance News &#38; Info</title>
		<link>http://msbusiness.com/blog/2010/03/11/mdes-reauthorization-bill-misses-deadline/#comment-16242</link>
		<dc:creator>MDES reauthorization bill misses deadline &#124; Insurance News &#38; Info</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:57:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://msbusiness.com/?p=20483#comment-16242</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] more on Mississippi Business Journal    Share and [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] more on Mississippi Business Journal    Share and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
