Regulations in Relation to Small Businesses - Revision history

imported>Jackie: /* Effects & Consequences */

2016-02-10T23:23:47Z

Effects & Consequences

imported>Jackie at 23:00, 10 February 2016

2016-02-10T23:00:33Z

imported>Jackie at 22:53, 10 February 2016

2016-02-10T22:53:10Z

imported>Jackie at 22:38, 10 February 2016

2016-02-10T22:38:03Z

imported>Jackie at 22:36, 10 February 2016

2016-02-10T22:36:17Z

imported>Jackie at 22:28, 10 February 2016

2016-02-10T22:28:21Z

imported>Jackie at 22:26, 10 February 2016

2016-02-10T22:26:50Z

imported>Meghana: /* EPA Evades RFA Act through Clean Water Act */

2016-02-10T22:01:34Z

EPA Evades RFA Act through Clean Water Act

imported>Meghana: /* EPA Evades RFA Act through Clean Water Act */

2016-02-10T21:44:49Z

EPA Evades RFA Act through Clean Water Act

imported>Meghana: /* EPA Evades RFA Act through Clean Water Act */

2016-02-10T21:41:35Z

EPA Evades RFA Act through Clean Water Act

@@ Line 81: / Line 81: @@
 *Few workers would actually get bigger paychecks
 **"A recent report released by the NRF said that employers were much more likely to cut wages and bonuses or reduce hours to avoid paying overtime. If employers made no changes to their pay and scheduling structure, an option the NRF acknowledged is highly unlikely, overtime costs would run businesses $9.5 billion under the proposed changes" [http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-obama-overtime-rules-explainer-20150630-htmlstory.html (LATimes)]
 ===Solutions===

@@ Line 79: / Line 79: @@
 *The proposed rule received some 270,000 comments during the 60-day period after its publication in June 2015. By comparison, the agency received 75,280 comments in response to its last proposed rule update in 2004.
 *Many employers—especially small and midsize businesses—wouldn’t be able to absorb the increased labor and litigation costs, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce [https://www.uschamber.com/above-the-fold/overtime-rule-would-hurt-more-help (COC)]
 ===Solutions===
+*"Government wage mandates are no substitute for economic growth, and contrary to the administration’s assertions, they do little to lift the middle class. If our leaders want to see hiring accelerate and incomes climb, they should pursue pro-growth policies that enable employers to expand, invest, and create more high-paying opportunities for workers." [https://www.uschamber.com/above-the-fold/overtime-rule-would-hurt-more-help (COC)]
+*"The U.S. Chamber continues to advocate for commonsense regulatory and legal reform, a simplified tax code that lowers rates for businesses and individuals, long-term investment in infrastructure, and policies that will allow the United States to capitalize on its vast energy resources."[https://www.uschamber.com/above-the-fold/overtime-rule-would-hurt-more-help (COC)]

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:53, 10 February 2016
Line 78:		Line 78:
	**Fewer salaried, managerial positions → little advancement opportunities		**Fewer salaried, managerial positions → little advancement opportunities
	*The proposed rule received some 270,000 comments during the 60-day period after its publication in June 2015. By comparison, the agency received 75,280 comments in response to its last proposed rule update in 2004.		*The proposed rule received some 270,000 comments during the 60-day period after its publication in June 2015. By comparison, the agency received 75,280 comments in response to its last proposed rule update in 2004.
		+	*Many employers—especially small and midsize businesses—wouldn’t be able to absorb the increased labor and litigation costs, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce [https://www.uschamber.com/above-the-fold/overtime-rule-would-hurt-more-help (COC)]
		+
		+	===Solutions===
		+	*

@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 **Many white-collar workers with very low salaries (sometimes just above the overtime threshold) can be classified by their employers as professionals, administrators, or executives–and thus exempted from overtime pay
 *Proposed changes:
-**New rule states that any salaried worker who earns less than $50,440 will be eligible for overtime
+**New rule states that any salaried worker who earns less than $50,440 (40th percentile) will be eligible for overtime
 ***This would be a 110% increase from 23,660
 ===Effects & Consequences===

@@ Line 57: / Line 57: @@
 *Will this make electricity more costly for people, in particular small businesses?
-===Expansion of Overtime Eligibility===
+==Expansion of Overtime Eligibility==
 *Expected to be implemented late 2016
 *On March 13, 2014, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum directing the Department of Labor to update the regulations defining which white collar workers are protected by the FLSA's minimum wage and overtime standards [http://www.dol.gov/whd/overtime/nprm2015/ (DOL)]
 *The memorandum instructed the Department to look for ways to modernize and simplify the regulations while ensuring that the FLSA's intended overtime protections are fully implemented [http://www.dol.gov/whd/overtime/nprm2015/ (DOL)]
 *Previously:
 **”Salaried workers who earn below $455 per week, or $23,660 per year, are automatically eligible for overtime pay–regardless of the nature of their job or the duties they perform.” [http://www.alternet.org/economy/8-questions-answered-about-obamas-new-proposed-overtime-pay-increase (Alternet)]
@@ Line 68: / Line 70: @@
 **New rule states that any salaried worker who earns less than $50,440 will be eligible for overtime
 ***This would be a 110% increase from 23,660
 *Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy Institute, a research group partly funded by labor unions, has estimated that the higher salary threshold would expand overtime to as many as 15 million additional workers [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-29/obama-said-set-to-expand-overtime-eligibility-for-millions (Bloomberg)]
 *”NFIB estimates that about 40% of small businesses will have employees newly eligible for time-and-a-half overtime pay. If a business cannot afford to pay managers over $50,000 per year, the business will have to change these employees from salaried exempt to hourly nonexempt employees and prohibit overtime work.” [http://www.nfib.com/article/new-overtime-rule-add-costs-to-small-businesses-and-hurts-workers-70007/ (NFIB-OR)]

@@ Line 54: / Line 54: @@
 ====Greenhouse Gas Emissions====
 *Final rule issued August 2015
-*Require states to increase the percentage of power they generate from alternative sources, which are weaker and more epensive
+*Require states to increase the percentage of power they generate from alternative sources, which are weaker and more expensive
 *Will this make electricity more costly for people, in particular small businesses?
-====Expansion of Overtime Eligibility====
-*Expected to be implemented late 2016, proposed in July 2015
+===Expansion of Overtime Eligibility===
-*Any salaried worker who earns less than $50,440 will be eligible for overtime
+*Expected to be implemented late 2016
-**Currently the threshold is at $23,660
+*On March 13, 2014, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum directing the Department of Labor to update the regulations defining which white collar workers are protected by the FLSA's minimum wage and overtime standards [http://www.dol.gov/whd/overtime/nprm2015/ (DOL)]
-**This would be a 110% increase
+*The memorandum instructed the Department to look for ways to modernize and simplify the regulations while ensuring that the FLSA's intended overtime protections are fully implemented [http://www.dol.gov/whd/overtime/nprm2015/ (DOL)]
 *”NFIB estimates that about 40% of small businesses will have employees newly eligible for time-and-a-half overtime pay. If a business cannot afford to pay managers over $50,000 per year, the business will have to change these employees from salaried exempt to hourly nonexempt employees and prohibit overtime work.” [http://www.nfib.com/article/new-overtime-rule-add-costs-to-small-businesses-and-hurts-workers-70007/ (NFIB-OR)]
 *For small businesses to avoid the overtime pay, managers would probably be moved from salaried positions to hourly jobs
@@ Line 66: / Line 74: @@
 **Decreased worker morale
 **Fewer salaried, managerial positions → little advancement opportunities

@@ Line 103: / Line 103: @@
 Key Points:
 [http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/09/waters_of_the_united_states_epa_s_proposed_update_to_the_clean_water_act.html Slate]
 ===Complexity Costs Money===

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:44, 10 February 2016
Line 102:		Line 102:

	Key Points:		Key Points:
		+	[http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/09/waters_of_the_united_states_epa_s_proposed_update_to_the_clean_water_act.html Slate]

	===Complexity Costs Money===		===Complexity Costs Money===

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:41, 10 February 2016
Line 100:		Line 100:

	Even more troubling, the rule does not take into consideration the economic impact on small businesses. Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, federal agencies must review the cost of a proposed rule on small business; the EPA, however, bypassed this requirement, suggesting the new rule not directly affect small businesses. Key members of Congress disagree, including both the House and Senate Small Business Committees. In comments to the EPA, we at the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) emphasized the proposed regulation "represents bad public policy because it increases regulatory burdens on small business landowners by expanding the jurisdictional reach of the Clean Water Act." We asked the EPA to withdraw the rule until the required comprehensive analysis is complete."		Even more troubling, the rule does not take into consideration the economic impact on small businesses. Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, federal agencies must review the cost of a proposed rule on small business; the EPA, however, bypassed this requirement, suggesting the new rule not directly affect small businesses. Key members of Congress disagree, including both the House and Senate Small Business Committees. In comments to the EPA, we at the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) emphasized the proposed regulation "represents bad public policy because it increases regulatory burdens on small business landowners by expanding the jurisdictional reach of the Clean Water Act." We asked the EPA to withdraw the rule until the required comprehensive analysis is complete."
		+
		+	Key Points:

	===Complexity Costs Money===		===Complexity Costs Money===