Unemployment - working in multiple states

[louisgab]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Hawaii
I which state do I file for unemployment?

I am currently living in Hawaii. I lived and worked in Colorado from 1/2006 to 7/2016. In July 2016, my company lost the contract with our only client in the Denver area and I lost my position at our client's facility. I was transferred (on paper - not physically) from my company's Denver office to one of our Houston offices which manages various projects throughout the country. I have been employed by my company since 1999. I remain employed by my company, but I now have to travel to various locations for short term (3 to 8 week) projects for my company. My company does not have enough work for me to work year round in any one location. Earlier this year, I filed for unemployment to help me during the weeks I was not receiving any hours or wages from my employer. I initially tried to file a claim in my state of residence, but learned that I had to file in the state I had earnings in the previous 3 or 4 quarters. So, I filed through Colorado and have had no issues. Colorado considers me as a "job attached" employee with reduced hours. I receive the full benefit amount each week that my company doesn't have work for me. My benefits through Colorado will end 12/31/2017. I am unsure where to file next year.

I obviously want to get the maximum benefit available to me. One of my co-workers said he has filed in Massachusetts (which has a large weekly benefit amount) even though he has never lived there or worked there. Apparently my company has an office there and somehow it was approved. Is it ok for me to file in any state my company pays into UI? Or do I have to file only in one of the states I worked? Or do I file in Texas because I am paid through our Houston office?

For what it is worth:
-So far since 2016Q4, I have worked in California, Alaska, Washington, and a few days in Colorado.
-My company is based in New Jersey
-I am employed through one of our Texas offices
-We have offices in almost every state
-The only income taxes taken from check are Hawaii income tax (even though I never work there) - I don't think this even matters

Thanks in advance for the help!

 

[justalayman]

Your friend has done something, likely illegal, to circumvent the Massachusetts law. It used to be common for people to travel to Mass to file for UI even if they haven’t worked there in their base year. They changed their laws a couple of years back. It is now required to physically work in the state for some period of time to claim UI there. There have been companies created to employ people for a short period of time so they could draw Mass. the problem is they charged the employee to do it. The last I heard the operator of one of that type of businesses was heading to jail.



Your employer should be paying in UI taxes in the state you are employed. The simplest way to figure out what state you have a claim for UI in is: what state do you pay taxes to. That isn’t 100% dependable as some states have reciprocal agreements where the resident of one state working in the other pays tax to only their home state.

 

[louisgab]

Your friend has done something, likely illegal, to circumvent the Massachusetts law. It used to be common for people to travel to Mass to file for UI even if they haven’t worked there in their base year. They changed their laws a couple of years back. It is now required to physically work in the state for some period of time to claim UI there. There have been companies created to employ people for a short period of time so they could draw Mass. the problem is they charged the employee to do it. The last I heard the operator of one of that type of businesses was heading to jail.



Your employer should be paying in UI taxes in the state you are employed. The simplest way to figure out what state you have a claim for UI in is: what state do you pay taxes to. That isn’t 100% dependable as some states have reciprocal agreements where the resident of one state working in the other pays tax to only their home state.

Regarding my friend and the Massachusetts claim - I found out that it was several years ago that he did this and he actually rented a van with other employees and drove to Mass.

Other fellow employees joined the conversation about this and a few said they file in Texas with success even though they have never actually done work there or lived there. Apparently since we are labeled asTexas employees billed out of our Houston office, our company reports our income to TX even though they don't have a state income tax. Does this sound right or am I working with some shade tree legal consultants?

Regarding the state I pay taxes to - I pay HI state tax, but when i called them to start a UI claim they had no record of me earning income in Hawaii (because I don't work there) and that I could not file.

 

[justalayman]

What the state of Hawaii told you would be correct. No earnings in a state means they didn’t pay into that state’s UI system ergo no UI in that state even though you end up paying state taxes.


Do you file non-resident returns in all the states you work in?

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

If he never worked in HI he should NOT be having state income taxes deducted there. The fact that they are doing so makes me wonder if they are even doing State UI correctly.

Are you paid via a PEO. In other words does your paycheck have another companies name on it?

 

[LdiJ]

If he never worked in HI he should be having state income taxes deducted there. The fact that they are doing so makes me wonder if they are even doing State UI correctly.

Are you paid via a PEO. In other words does your paycheck have another companies name on it?

They should be withholding taxes for the state where he resides, at least, and possibly should also be deducting taxes for states where he has worked, if those states have income tax. Of the ones he mentioned, Alaska, Washington and Texas do not have state income tax.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I obviously missed a "not" in my original response. f he never worked in HI he should NOT be having state income taxes deducted there.

 

[commentator]

One more time I will attempt to tell you what I know from working interstate unemployment claims for more than thirty years. ALL this "where do I file???" is useless. File in the state where you reside, using the telephone or internet system of that state. Give the unemployment system the name and contact information for all the companies you have worked for in the last six quarters. They will, through connecting you to what is called the "interstate claims system" pull in all your wages from every state that has been used to set up and pay in employer taxes on your social security number.

Where you paid in taxes is irrelevant. YOUR state or federal taxes, are not, in most states, any part of unemployment insurance. In those where a tiny bit of unemployment is taken from the claimant, that's just what it is, a very tiny proportion. Unemployment taxes are taken almost 100% from the employer. What your claim sets up for, and where (which state) the money shows up in all depends into which state's system they have paid in employer taxes under your social security number. And where they reported your wages, and where they elected to pay in unemployment taxes on you is their decision. You can't request anything different, you don't get to say. It is not uncommon for a company to use one state only, even though their employees have multiple worksites in other states. That would cover the "we had a Texas claim, though we don't do any work in Texas." Several large companies are Texas only tax payers. That's because Texas is very low paying on the unemployment benefits, and very employer tax friendly.

As to the guys who drove to Massachusetts, they'd have HAD to have at least SOME tiny percentage of wages in Massachusetts to get a Massachusetts claim. What folks used to do in the days before the internet was drive to Massachusetts, get a residential address, have a multi-state claim showing SOME Massachusetts wages, and sign up to draw a Massachusetts claim. Then they'd move home and have their high WBA Massachusetts claim transferred back to Kentucky or wherever.

The only time you can literally roll in and ask to have a claim filed in a state, though you have never worked there, have no employer taxes paid on your there, and draw a claim from that state, like Massachusetts, is if you are getting out of the military, and will be drawing a federal claim. Those claims monies from the federal government are transferred to the state where you reside and file the claim. It comes out as a Tennessee claim, or a Massachusetts claim, or a Texas claim, with the benefits and regulations of that particular state where it is filed. So it has proved smart sometimes for people who are getting out of the military or some other kind of federal government employment to take themselves to a high paying state and get set up and file their claim there. If you really think 26 weeks of "rocking chair money" is worth making that sort of manipulation for.

Regardless of where you file the claim from, if you have wages in more than two states, there will be options. If you have wages in multiple states, more than two, you are generally allowed to select the state to file the claim against that has the most potential for pay, in other words, it used to be that if you could get in even one tiny sliver of Massachusetts wages in your monetary determination (that will be issued at the actual time of claim filing) you could file a Massachusetts claim, which is the best paying in the U.S. But that has everything to do with where your employer reported your wages, not where you worked, actual worksite. And Massachusetts, after many years of being targeted by people determined to beat the system, has made it considerably harder to have enough wages to set up a Massachusetts claim. No amount of guesses, no future projections, no entity but the unemployment service can tell you where wages have been paid into the unemployment tax system for you, and they cannot tell you that until you actually file the next claim.

They are carefully trained never to make pre-forecasts about anyone's claim eligibility or possible claim amount.

There's no way you can plan now what state to draw off of, or how much you'll draw, or which state to go to in order to file, it will all be taken care of when you are ready to file that next claim. If your benefits end 12/31/17, then you can file an interstate claim again the week after that. And then, they'll pull in all the wages you have in the base periods where you've worked in the past roughly six quarters. It will be what it is. You do not decide where to pay in unemployment taxes on yourself, you are paid in on by your company. Deciding "where to file" is irrelevant. You just file an interstate claim and it will be set up according to what states you have wages in, perhaps with you picking which of those states you want the claim to be from if you have more than two, but not till the claim is officially filed, which means January of 2018.

Love the term "shade tree legal consultants" though really unemployment insurance consultants is more what they are trying to be than legal consultants. Most attorneys are by no means experts on unemployment law, as it is a closed agency system and people spend years dealing only with unemployment law, not regular law.

 

[Zigner]

One more time I will attempt to tell you what I know from working interstate unemployment claims for more than thirty years. ALL this "where do I file???" is useless. File in the state where you reside, using the telephone or internet system of that state. Give the unemployment system the name and contact information for all the companies you have worked for in the last six quarters. They will, through connecting you to what is called the "interstate claims system" pull in all your wages from every state that has been used to set up and pay in employer taxes on your social security number.

How do you reconcile this with the OP's statement?

I initially tried to file a claim in my state of residence, but learned that I had to file in the state I had earnings in the previous 3 or 4 quarters. So, I filed through Colorado and have had no issues. Colorado considers me as a "job attached" employee with reduced hours. I receive the full benefit amount each week that my company doesn't have work for me.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I'm with commentator on this one the OP should file in the state where he lives now. If you worked and reported to work in multiple states there will be a combined wage claim.

As far as the part about the Massachusetts claims his friends made the only way I can think that happened is through fraud on the part of the friends and fraud or incompetence on the part of the employer and the Mass UI agency.

 

[justalayman]

One more time I will attempt to tell you what I know from working interstate unemployment claims for more than thirty years. ALL this "where do I file???" is useless. File in the state where you reside, using the telephone or internet system of that state. Give the unemployment system the name and contact information for all the companies you have worked for in the last six quarters. They will, through connecting you to what is called the "interstate claims system" pull in all your wages from every state that has been used to set up and pay in employer taxes on your social security number.

Where you paid in taxes is irrelevant. YOUR taxes, are not, in most states, any part of unemployment insurance. In those where a tiny bit of unemployment is taken from the claimant, that's just what it is, a very tiny proportion. Those taxes are taken almost 100% from the employer. What your claim sets up for, and where (which state) the money shows up in all depends into which state's sytem they have paid in employer taxes under your social security number. And where they reported your wages, and where they elected to pay in unemployment taxes on you is their decision. You can't request anything different, you don't get to say. It is not uncommon for a company to use one state only, even though their employees have multiple worksites in other states.

Regardless of where you file the claim from, if you have wages in more than two states, there will be options. If you have wages in multiple states, more than two, you are generally allowed to select the state to file the claim against that has the most potential for pay, in other words, it used to be that if you could get in even one tiny sliver of Massachusetts wages in your monetary determination (that will be issued at the actual time of claim filing) you could file a Massachusetts claim, which is the best paying in the U.S. But that has everything to do with where your employer reported your wages, not where you worked, actual worksite. And Massachusetts, after many years of being targeted by people determined to beat the system, has made it considerably harder to have enough wages to set up a Massachusetts claim. No amount of guesses, no future projections, no entity but the unemployment service can tell you where wages have been paid into the unemployment tax system for you, and they cannot tell you that until you actually file the next claim.

They are carefully trained never to make pre-forecasts about anyone's claim eligibility or possible claim amount.

There's no way you can plan now what state to draw off of, or how much you'll draw, or which state to go to in order to file, it will all be taken care of when you are ready to file that next claim. If your benefits end 12/31/17, then you can file an interstate claim again the week after that. And then, they'll pull in all the wages you have in the base periods where you've worked in the past roughly six quarters. It will be what it is. You do not decide where to pay in unemployment taxes on yourself, you are paid in on by your company. Deciding "where to file" is irrelevant. You just file an interstate claim and it will be set up according to what states you have wages in, perhaps with you picking which of those states you want the claim to be from if you have more than two, but not till the claim is officially filed, which means January of 2018.

You’re still wrong. I live in MI and typically work in Indiana. If I have not worked in MI during the base period I cannot file and collect UI from Michigan. Been there done that. It isn’t I think I know. It’s I have actually dealt with it. I was denied when in that situation.


What states taxes are withheld is important for the fact thst is most likely the state that the UI is being paid in to. In my situation Indiana and Michigan have reciprocal tax rules where I do not have to file a return in Indiana (unless the employer improperly withheld Indiana taxes and I want them back) and vice verse for people working in MI and living in Indiana. Regardless, unless I work in MI I will not be awarded UI from MI. I must file in IN.

It used to be you never had to step foot in MA be able to file a claim there (I know plenty of guys thst used to do it). They changed the laws a couple years ago where you now have to actually work in the state. I believe there is an amount of time specified but not sure. All the companies setting up the shams to be able to allow a guy to file would make you an employee for 2 weeks. I would guess that is the magic number.

It’s not if you work in more than two states that allows an interstate claim. It’s 2 or more. Again, I live this.

This is from DOL

https://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/unemploy/uifactsheet.asp

Generally, you should file your claim with the state where you worked. If you worked in a state other than the one where you now live or if you worked in multiple states, the state UI agency where you now live can provide information about how to file your claim with other states. You may also click on the link above to find contact information for all states.

I don’t know if this link will be allowed but that site does a pretty good job of explaining the situation

http://www.andersentax.com/newsletter/2009/december/unemptax.php

 

[justalayman]

I'm with commentator on this one the OP should file in the state where he lives now. If you worked and reported to work in multiple states there will be a combined wage claim.

As far as the part about the Massachusetts claims his friends made the only way I can think that happened is through fraud on the part of the friends and fraud or incompetence on the part of the employer and the Mass UI agency.

To the MA issue; it used to be completely legal to file in MA, regardless where you had been employed. They had one of the highest pay out rates and a lot of people took advantage of this. A few years back they changed their laws where you actually had to work in MA for some period of time. As the op stated his friends did this years ago. It was likely while it was still legal to file in MA regardless of where you worked.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I didn't know that. How did the UI system not completely collapse?

 

[Zigner]

I'm with commentator on this one the OP should file in the state where he lives now. If you worked and reported to work in multiple states there will be a combined wage claim.

As far as the part about the Massachusetts claims his friends made the only way I can think that happened is through fraud on the part of the friends and fraud or incompetence on the part of the employer and the Mass UI agency.

I'll ask you the same question. How do you reconcile your recommendation with the actual experience the OP has with attempting to file in HI and being told to file in CO, which he subsequently did, and from which he's been collecting benefits?

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I'll ask you the same question. How do you reconcile your recommendation with the actual experience the OP has with attempting to file in HI and being told to file in CO, which he subsequently did, and from which he's been collecting benefits?

I really can't. I processed two separate TEXAS UI claims this week for employees of two different clients. In both cases the employees have been employees have been employed and living in Arkansas and have been with the client full time for over three years (so we are well outside the chance of there being base period wages in TX). I've had them before with pretty much the same fact set. If they don't get disqualified for cause they get paid by the Texas Workforce Commission and I see it as a CWC on the quarterly statement of charges against the client Arkansas UI account.

I'll admit I haven't had this with every state in the union and certainly not with every possible permutation of pairs of states. But I've seen it with enough states over the last almost two decades to call it more than an occasional accident.