unemplyment benefits

[OHRoadwarrior]

No, you're wrong. No matter how many times you type the same thing. Even if he took cash earned from the rentals, it's not "wages paid by a covered employer" which is the only thing the unemployment system cares about. By your logic, if a person chose to reinvest dividends from stock they held to buy more stock that would also count against them, which of course it does not.

You are not employed by a stock investment.

 

[justalayman]

You are not employed by a stock investment.

but I do not provide services to (work for) my stock investments either.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

The state does consider an officer of an llc as employed whether they receive a salary or not.


From floridajobs.org regarding self employment and eligibility.

Determinations concerning eligibility for benefits can only be made after a claim is filed, as we are required to obtain the facts from you and the employer concerning these and other eligibility issues.

 

[LdiJ]

You are not employed by a stock investment.

Nor is he employed by the LLC that holds his investment in rental properties. The fact that he actively manages his properties does not make him an employee of the LLC. Now, if the LLC had multiple members and he was the only one providing any of the labor, in exchange for an actual salary, then your argument would have some validity. However that is not the case here.

 

[justalayman]

The state does consider an officer of an llc as employed whether they receive a salary or not.

things that make you go hhhmmmmm.


I missed swalsh's post:

No, you're wrong. No matter how many times you type the same thing. Even if he took cash earned from the rentals, it's not "wages paid by a covered employer" which is the only thing the unemployment system cares about. By your logic, if a person chose to reinvest dividends from stock they held to buy more stock that would also count against them, which of course it does not.

can't speak to Florida specifically but states I am aware of say swalsh is wrong. Heck, I know if I started to draw my pension it changed my UI benefits. If I withdrew my annuity it changed my benefits.

and neither of those are benefits from a covered employer. (no, they really aren't even if you want to argue they are an employer provided benefit as they are not in my situation)

 

[swalsh411]

You are not employed by a stock investment.

OP is not employed by his business, at least for this purpose.

Heck, I know if I started to draw my pension it changed my UI benefits. If I withdrew my annuity it changed my benefits.

Ok. But that doesn't really have anything to do with the OP's situation.

Here is the relevant statute defining "wages" and I do not see how the rental income the OP receives, even if he took a distribution, counts.

http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2011/443.1217

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Nor is he employed by the LLC that holds his investment in rental properties. The fact that he actively manages his properties does not make him an employee of the LLC. Now, if the LLC had multiple members and he was the only one providing any of the labor, in exchange for an actual salary, then your argument would have some validity. However that is not the case here.

It is going to be an exercise in futility to argue with you. UI will take OP's self employment into consideration when he applies. What is up for debate is whether they will use it to exclude him or determine he should have some income from it, based on the hours he works. Hopefully he will advise us what the outcome was, after he applies.

 

[swalsh411]

It is going to be an exercise in futility to argue with you. UI will take OP's self employment into consideration when he applies. What is up for debate is whether they will use it to exclude him or determine he should have some income from it, based on the hours he works. Hopefully he will advise us what the outcome was, after he applies.

Rental income (which the OP doesn't even have) is not eligible wages for unemployment. I don't know how to make this any clearer.

 

[commentator]

".....can't speak to Florida specifically but states I am aware of say swalsh is wrong. Heck, I know if I started to draw my pension it changed my UI benefits. If I withdrew my annuity it changed my benefits.

and neither of those are benefits from a covered employer. (no, they really aren't even if you want to argue they are an employer provided benefit as they are not in my situation."

No, swalsh isn't wrong. Neither of those two things you mention are wages from a covered employer from work you did during the week you were filing for.

But like this LLC issue, they are both things that need to be reported and discussed with the unemployment system after the OP has filed the claim. I still maintain that this person is not going to be considered employed for unemployment insurance purposes, but no one can settle this for him but the system when he files his FL claim.

Though neither of those two things you mention are covered wages, for certain one of them will affect your unemployment benefits. Pensions have to be reported and will affect your benefits if they meet the definition in the law(non-contributory and all that) because they are a benefit that is paid to you during a time you are not working, based on money paid in for you during the time you were working.

I'm not at all sure what sort of annuity you're talking about, not at all sure it would affect your claim. A personal annuity account, paid for not by the former employer but by you....? Like I said, I'm not at all sure this would affect your benefits, would really need to look at it individually, but anyhow, I've seen a lot of those self employment situations from people who were filing claims, and most of the time and for most claimants, they do not affect your eligibility.

Neither they or the OP's described situation are disqualifying because they raise your income above some level. That is because there is no income cap on unemployment, they do not ask for your total family income when you are certified for benefits, and you do not have to be under any income level to draw unemployment benefits. It isn't a needs based program, and it is based on many factors, including availability. There are many people who are working full time and picking up other work on the side or running their own small business on the side, and they usually end up fully eligible for benefits if they are laid off from their principal job.

 

[justalayman]

Ok, here's another tidbit from Florida

 Gross income earned in self-employment must be reported for the week in which the wages were
earned, not paid. A self-employed person is not eligible for benefits when engaged in selfemployment for the majority of the time, even if no money is earned.

No, Justy, swalsh isn't wrong. Neither of those two things you mention are wages from a covered employer from work you did during the week you were filing for. I still maintain that this person is not going to be considered employed for unemployment insurance purposes.

corrrect, they are not wages but yes, they did affect my UI payment. That is a known fact.

I'm not at all sure what sort of annuity you're talking about, wonder if this is true. A personal annuity account, paid for not by the former employer but by you....? Not at all sure this would affect your benefits, would really need to look at it.

it's an annuity. You know. You pay money in, they keep if for a long time and then you draw it out. It was purchased through my union, not the employer. Same thing with the pension.

But though they are not wages, for certain one of them will affect your unemployment benefits. Pensions have to be reported and will affect your benefits meet the definition in the law,(non-contributory and all that) because they are a benefit that is paid to you during the time you are not working, but based on the wages paid in to you during the time you were working.

didn't I read that if it wasn't wages it doesn't count????

They are not disqualifying because they raise your income above some level.

I didn't say it was disqualifying. It resulted in reduced UI benefits.

 

[ecmst12]

Gross income in self employment - you do a task for someone, and they pay you directly. That is NOT even close to what is going on here. And OP is far from spending "the majority of the time" on the rental properties.

 

[justalayman]

Gross income in self employment - you do a task for someone, and they pay you directly. That is NOT even close to what is going on here. And OP is far from spending "the majority of the time" on the rental properties.

He's not self employed? Then what would you call it? A hobby? He is working to earn income whether it be deferred or realized currently, that is what he is doing. But in the end, he doesn't even have to earn money for it to be considered that. They are concerned about the applicant not being available for any work, any time, starting immediately.

 Gross income earned in self-employment must be reported for the week in which the wages were
earned, not paid. A self-employed person is not eligible for benefits when engaged in selfemployment for the majority of the time, even if no money is earned.

and unless you have the OP punching a time clock, you have no idea if it is a majority of the time or not. Nor do you know what the state will consider to be a majority of the time.

but enough of this for me. The OP should be filing for unemployment and the state will make the call.

 

[commentator]

Sigh. It's about whether he states to them that he is not available for other work because he is spending the majority of his time on this work. In other words, if he was offered a job, would he take it, or would he say, "I can't, I am too busy on my self employment."

It says if it isn't "covered wages" (wages paid in by an employer who has an unemployment tax account) it isn't considered wages that will disqualify you for benefits. A pension is still disqualifying, though it's not that. There are pension questions in each certifications, just like there are "did you work ?questions."

Example: Susie Someone works 40 hours a week at the widget mill. She also works on weekends at the local Dairy Chief. When the mill closes down, Susie is laid off, she files for unemployment and reports each week the 15 hours she works for this covered employer. Her benefits are reduced by a small amount each week because the Dairy Chief is a covered part time employer. Like the widget mill, they pay in and have an unemployment tax account with the state. But she still is able to draw benefits, because she is not making more in covered wages each week than she could draw, and she is available for other full time work, just like her work at the widget mill has been.

Example two: Susie works 40 hours a week at the widget mill. She also cleans houses for people sometimes on weekends, hauls hay for her grandfather, sells copper she has stolen, and sells real estate with her own LLC company nights and weekends. Her income from these endeavors is not from a covered employer. She is still available for regular full time work similar to what she has done. This income which comes to her intermittently is not disqualifying, unless Susis refuses to cooperate with job search,or tells the u.i. system she is not able and available for other work because her self employment has picked up to the extent that she does not have time to do job searches.

But all we need to do is let the OP file the claim. He's not getting good advice from us here, and we can't file the claim for him.We're beating this horse to death to no purpose.

 

[LdiJ]

Once again, managing rental units that you own is NOT self-employment.

 

[ecmst12]

They are concerned about the applicant not being available for any work, any time, starting immediately.

Incorrect. They are concerned about the applicant being available for suitable work (not ANY WORK) during the hours which he was customarily employed in his previous job. He will not be expected to take a job digging ditches when he was previously employed as a computer programmer, even if it is available. He will not be expected to take a job working overnights when he was previously employed during normal working hours. He may CHOOSE to do those things, but if he does not, he will not be disqualified for benefits.

And he is not "working for income" as in wages. He is investing in a property, which currently generates no income and which certainly pays him no wages. Eventually when the renovations are complete, he may earn some income from this property, but it still won't be WAGES, it will be investment income. He is not paid by the LLC for the hours he spends or the job he does, and he never will be. The LLC will not be required to withhold payroll taxes from any distributions he may take, he won't pay SS or Medicare tax on them, and the taxes he does pay on them will be as investment income, not wages. Get it already?