Tag: Unemployment Legislative Updates

Washington House Bill 2264 Change Notification Washington House Bill 2264 expands the definition of when an employee is considered unemployed “through no fault of their own” for unemployment insurance purposes. Individuals who voluntarily elect to be included in a layoff or workforce reduction, after the employer initiates the process, may still qualify for unemployment benefits. Specifically, if the employer announces a planned reduction in force and an employee volunteers to be part of that reduction, the separation will still be treated as employer-initiated. The law also clarifies that allowing an employee to rescind their offer to be included in the layoff does not impact eligibility, and it excludes situations involving voluntary early retirement incentives or benefit modifications. Effective Date 90 days after adjournment Washington HB 2264 Implication to Stakeholders This change broadens eligibility for unemployment benefits in workforce reduction scenarios, which may lead to an increase in chargeable claims against employer accounts. Even when employees proactively volunteer for separation, these separations will generally be treated as employer-driven if the layoff process was initiated by the employer. As a result, employers may see higher unemployment insurance costs and reduced ability to contest claims on the basis that the separation was voluntary. Recommended Action Employers should review and potentially revise their workforce reduction policies and communication strategies to ensure clarity around layoff processes. It is advisable to carefully document that the employer initiated the reduction and maintain detailed records of all employee communications and decisions. Additionally, employers should anticipate potential increases in unemployment claims tied to voluntary layoff participation and consider incorporating this into workforce planning and cost projections. Consulting with unemployment insurance advisors or legal counsel can also help ensure compliance and effective claim management under the new standard.

California Senate Bill 854 Change Notification This measure updates the California Unemployment Insurance Code to clarify how official notices can be delivered. Specifically, it expands the definition of “mail,” “mailed,” or “mailing” to include not only traditional paper documents sent through the U.S. Postal Service or other carriers, but also electronic communications such as emails or online notifications. Effective Date January 1, 2026 California SB 854 Implication to Stakeholders For employers, this means that important unemployment insurance notices—such as claim determinations, requests for information, or appeal deadlines—may be sent electronically rather than by paper mail. As a result, it is important to regularly monitor any designated email addresses or online accounts to ensure timely responses and avoid missing critical deadlines that could impact claims or your unemployment tax rate. Recommended Action Employers should review and update their internal processes for receiving unemployment insurance communications. This includes confirming that the correct email addresses are on file with the state, regularly monitoring designated inboxes and employer portals, and assigning responsibility to a specific individual or team for timely review and response to all notices. Employers may also want to implement backup monitoring procedures, such as shared inboxes or alerts, to reduce the risk of missed communications that could negatively impact claims outcomes or unemployment tax rates.

West Virginia Senate Bill 1053 Change Notification West Virginia Senate Bill 1053 authorizes the creation of a new Unemployment Automation and Administration Fund. This fund will be financed by assessing an annual fee of 7% of the employer’s taxable wages for the twelve-month period ending the preceding June 30. The assessment is subject to an annual cap of $18 million and only if the state’s unemployment trust fund balance remains above $300 million. Employers with a rate equal to zero are exempt from the payment of this assessment. Each liable employer will be notified of the amount due by March 31 of each year. The amount due will be considered delinquent if not paid within 30 days of the mailing date. The purpose of the fund is to modernize the state’s unemployment insurance systems, enhance job search and workforce development services, and support administrative operations. The Commissioner of WorkForce West Virginia is granted authority to implement and manage the fund through rulemaking. Effective Date July 1, 2026 West Virginia SB 1053 Implication for Stakeholders While this measure does not increase overall employer contribution rates, it creates an additional tax to be paid outside of the employers’ quarterly tax payment and is for administrative and system improvements rather than directly into the unemployment trust fund. Employers may indirectly benefit from more efficient claims processing, improved system functionality, and enhanced workforce services. However, there may be some concern around how long this assessment may be in place.  Once the fund reaches $60 million or July 1, 2031, whichever comes first, the assessment will be discontinued.  Recommended Action Employers should monitor communications from WorkForce West Virginia regarding any operational or procedural updates tied to system modernization efforts. It would also be prudent to stay informed on any future rulemaking that could affect reporting, claims handling, or employer responsibilities. Internally, employers may want to review their unemployment claims management processes to ensure they are prepared to take advantage of improved system capabilities as they are implemented.

Having spent decades working with unemployment programs across the country—from state agencies to employer groups to TPAs—I’ve seen many changes in how states administer unemployment claims. Some changes feel routine. Others signal a shift toward modernization. New Jersey’s recent passage of S.2357 falls into the second category. The law is designed to improve communication between employers and the New Jersey Department of Labor (NJDOL) by ensuring the state receives separation details sooner and more consistently. Recently, the Association of Unemployment Tax Organizations (AUTO) asked NJDOL to clarify several operational questions. The department’s written responses finally give employers a clearer picture of what to expect as the state moves forward with implementation. Below is a practical, easy-to-digest summary of what New Jersey employers should know. 1. The Heart of S.2357: Two Options for Employers NJDOL has confirmed that employers have two ways to meet the new requirement. Employers do not have to do both—just one. You must either: Option 1 — Respond to the UI claim notice within 7 days, or Option 2 — Provide the separation information in the employer portal within 7 days of separation. Either option satisfies the requirement on its own. Submitting the separation information at the time of separation is preferred because it gives the agency a head start and often leads to quicker, more accurate determinations. However, NJDOL emphasized that this is not mandatory.  If an employer simply responds to the initial claim notice within the 7-day timeframe, the requirement is considered met. This clarification should bring relief to many employers who feared the law imposed two separate, and potentially duplicative, steps. 2. About That $500 Penalty… You may have heard S.2357 includes a $500 penalty for failing to provide separation information. Here’s what NJDOL shared: The penalty remains part of the statute. NJDOL is not enforcing it at this time. The agency wants to give employers time to adjust to the new system. Enforcement could begin at a later date once the system is fully operational. In short, the penalty exists, but employers should focus on learning the process rather than worrying about fines right now. 3. Employer Access (EA) Portal Registration: The First Step To participate in the new reporting process, employers must activate their Employer Access (EA) account within the MyNewJersey system. NJDOL clarified the following: Employers need a unique authorization code to register. These codes were mailed to employers in July 2024. A follow-up statewide mailing is planned for January 2026 for employers who didn’t receive or misplaced their code. Employers must register before a TPA can link to their account. After the employer registers, the TPA can request access using the employer’s EIN and authorization code. The employer then approves (or denies) the request via email. Registration is truly the gateway to everything else. Without it, employers and TPAs cannot begin using the new separation reporting system. 4. Submitting Separation Details Early: How NJDOL Uses the Data Many employers asked how the state will handle separation information submitted before a former employee files a UI claim. NJDOL shared the following helpful process: Early separation details will be stored in the system but not acted upon immediately. The system will crossmatch this information daily against new UI claims. When a match occurs, the claimant will receive a fact-finding questionnaire that includes the employer’s earlier statement. If the employee never files for benefits, nothing is sent to the individual—and the information simply remains on record. This optional early submission can improve accuracy and reduce back-and-forth between employers, claimants, and the agency. 5. Practical Advice Moving Forward Based on NJDOL's responses, here’s what I would advise employers right now: Register your EA account as soon as you have your authorization code—this unlocks everything. Choose the approach that best fits your workflow: respond to the claim within 7 days OR post the separation at the time of separation. Don’t stress about penalties right now but do build good habits early. Stay in communication with your TPA so responsibilities are clear and aligned. Expect further refinement, as with any modernization effort, changes may continue as the system evolves. New Jersey’s intent is not to burden employers but to create a more consistent and efficient UI process. With clear expectations and the ability to choose the method that works best for your organization, compliance should feel manageable—not overwhelming. Experian Employer Services will continue to provide updates and best practices as available.

Starting in October 2025, the maximum weekly benefit amount (WBA) for unemployment benefits will increase from $504 per week to $869 per week.  Scheduled increases to the maximum WBA have been delayed for years because the state had an outstanding advance from a Title XII loan which was initiated to keep the New York Department of Labor Division of Unemployment’s trust fund solvent. The loan and interest were both paid in full recently so the new, higher WBA can now go into effect. Employers will also see an increase in the taxable wage base (TWB) for 2026 and a decrease in the unemployment tax rate schedule to be used for the 2026 tax rates.  The taxable wage base for 2026 is $13,000 which represents an increase of $200 from 2025.  The tax rate table to be used for 2026 is not yet finalized because it is based on the Size of Fund Index (SOFI) at the end of the rate fiscal year, which is September 30. Effective Date October 1, 2025 for the increase in the maximum WBA January 1, 2026 for the taxable wage base increase January 1, 2026 for the decrease in the tax rate schedule Implication to Stakeholders The substantial increase in the maximum WBA could negatively impact employers doing business in the state.  This is a 72% increase in the weekly benefit amount.  Since benefits paid from an employer’s fund balance have an impact on future tax rates, this increase could signal increases in tax rates for years to come. The increase in TWB may also mean an increase in taxes for employers doing business in the state starting in 2026. The decrease in the tax rate schedule for 2026 should mean lower taxes for employers however, that, coupled with the increase in the TWB could mean a wash for tax liability year over year (2025/2026).  That remains to be seen. Recommended Action Employers should monitor their benefit charge statements and tax rates as soon as they are received to prevent unwarranted charges from hitting their account and increasing tax rates.

Oregon HB 3024 changes an individual's maximum benefit amount after the individual is disqualified from UI benefits for termination cause.

Louisiana HB 153 adjusts work search requirements to reflect the ease of virtual job interviews and electronic applications for employment.

Employers should be aware of a new surcharge with Ohio HB 96 that goes into effect with the state's 2026 unemployment tax rates.

Montana MAR Notice 2025-29.1 clarifies language in statute around when a due date falls on a holiday or weekend and addresses appeal methods.

Hawaii HB 477 allows benefits to claimants on issues that it previously did not, such as during labor disputes.

Rhode Island SB 622 could increase employer responsibility for UI benefits paid if they have part-time workers until 2026.

Oregon SB 916 provides that an individual's UI benefits eligibility is not disqualified for any week unemployment is due to a labor dispute.

Oregon SB 143 revises Oregon's UI tax system by increasing the portion of employer tax rates used each calendar quarter for funding.

Louisiana SB 248 requires electronic filing for a notice of separation on the state's portal and delivered within 10 days to the employee.

Rhode Island HB 5448 changes the sunset for an increase in earnings a partial-UI claimant receives before being disqualified for UI benefits.

Oregon HB 2271 provides a credit against an employer's unemployment insurance taxes for calendar years 2025, 2026 and 2027 with conditions.

Connecticut SB 1312 Change Notification This measure reduces the amount of time an employer is allotted to protest quarterly unemployment benefit statements it believes are inaccurate. The protest deadline is reduced from 60 days to 40 days. Effective Date October 1, 2025 Connecticut Senate Bill 1312 Implication to Stakeholders Employers must be prepared to more quickly audit benefit charge statements upon receipt so they can meet the 40-day deadline for protest, if a protest is in order. Depending on the size of the organization, this could be somewhat difficult to accomplish. Recommended Action Employers should immediately review quarterly benefit charge statements for accuracy and protest any they believe are inaccurate.

Vermont SB 117 amends various unemployment rules including notice requirements for potential layoffs, electronic unemployment insurance notices, and more.