{ "id": "R41859", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R41859", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 606821, "date": "2019-10-23", "retrieved": "2019-10-29T22:19:01.736638", "title": "Unemployment Insurance: Consequences of Changes in State Unemployment Compensation Laws", "summary": "This report analyzes recent changes to state Unemployment Compensation (UC) programs. Two categories of UC state law issues are considered: (1) changes in the duration of state UC unemployment benefits, and (2) changes in the UC weekly benefit amount.\nIn recent years, some states have enacted legislation to decrease the maximum number of weeks of regular state UC benefits. Until 2011, all states paid at least up to 26 weeks of UC benefits to eligible, unemployed individuals. In 2011, however, six states passed legislation to decrease their maximum UC benefit durations: Arkansas, Florida, Illinois (only for calendar year 2012), Michigan, Missouri, and South Carolina. In 2012, Georgia also passed legislation to decrease the maximum UC benefit duration. In 2013, Kansas and North Carolina enacted similar legislation. Subsequently, in 2015, Arkansas and Missouri enacted additional state laws to further reduce their maximum UC durations. In the case of Missouri, however, the Missouri Supreme Court found the 2015 law unconstitutional; therefore, this further UC duration reduction is not in effect. In 2016, Idaho reduced its maximum UC duration. Arkansas passed a third reduction in its maximum UC duration in 2017. Finally, in 2019, Alabama reduced its maximum UC duration, effective January 1, 2020. As a result of these state law changes, depending on state unemployment, the shortest potential UC maximum duration is currently 12 weeks (in Florida and North Carolina), compared with 26 weeks prior to 2011.\nChanges in state UC benefit duration have consequences for the duration of federal unemployment benefits that may be available to unemployed workers, including Extended Benefits (EB) and benefits from the now-expired Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC08) program. Because state UC benefit duration is an underlying factor in the calculation of duration for additional federal unemployment benefits, reducing UC maximum duration also reduces the number of weeks available to unemployed workers in the federal extended unemployment programs (including EUC08, which is now expired, and EB).\nPrior to the EUC08 program\u2019s expiration on December 28, 2013 (December 29, 2013, in New York), states were temporarily subject to a nonreduction rule (under P.L. 111-205, as amended), which made the availability of federally financed EUC08 benefits contingent on not actively changing the state\u2019s method of calculating UC benefits, if it would have decreased weekly benefit amounts. Some states, however, make automatic adjustments to weekly benefit amounts under existing state law. Consequently, when these states experience certain conditions, such as a decrease in the average weekly wage used in the automatic adjustment calculation, their maximum weekly UC benefit amount may have been decreased without having violated the now-expired nonreduction rule. P.L. 112-96 provided a specific exception to the nonreduction rule in the case of state legislation enacted before March 1, 2012. In February 2013, North Carolina enacted legislation that actively reduced UC weekly benefit amount calculations beginning in July 2013. Due to this violation of the nonreduction rule, EUC08 benefits were no longer available in North Carolina, effective June 29, 2013. All EUC08 benefits expired as of the week ending on or before January 1, 2014 (i.e., December 28, 2013; or December 29, 2013, in New York State). Any reduction to the UC weekly benefit amount also translates into reduced EB weekly benefit amounts (and EUC08 benefit amounts when the program was authorized). \nOverall, the two types of changes to state UC laws and programs have consequences for the duration and amount of federal unemployment benefits. This report describes these changes and analyzes their consequences for UC, EUC08 (when it was authorized), and EB benefits. It will be updated, as needed, to reflect additional state UC changes.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41859", "sha1": "6198a5c6ab62feb5bf482d5fb348b3c8ba0a3359", "filename": "files/20191023_R41859_6198a5c6ab62feb5bf482d5fb348b3c8ba0a3359.html", "images": {} }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41859", "sha1": "3658cd0514a5c3ca222f07770da570adab847334", "filename": "files/20191023_R41859_3658cd0514a5c3ca222f07770da570adab847334.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4888, "name": "Unemployment Insurance" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 578961, "date": "2018-03-07", "retrieved": "2018-03-09T00:00:25.771431", "title": "Unemployment Insurance: Consequences of Changes in State Unemployment Compensation Laws", "summary": "This report analyzes recent changes to state Unemployment Compensation (UC) programs. Two categories of UC state law issues are considered: (1) changes in the duration of state UC unemployment benefits, and (2) changes in the UC weekly benefit amount.\nIn recent years, some states have enacted legislation to decrease the maximum number of weeks of regular state UC benefits. Until 2011, all states paid at least up to 26 weeks of UC benefits to eligible, unemployed individuals. In 2011, however, six states passed legislation to decrease their maximum UC benefit durations: Arkansas, Florida, Illinois (only for calendar year 2012), Michigan, Missouri, and South Carolina. In 2012, Georgia also passed legislation to decrease the maximum UC benefit duration. In 2013, Kansas and North Carolina enacted similar legislation. Subsequently, in 2015, Arkansas and Missouri enacted additional state laws to further reduce their maximum UC durations. In the case of Missouri, however, the Missouri Supreme Court found the 2015 law unconstitutional; therefore, this further UC duration reduction is not in effect. In 2016, Idaho reduced its maximum UC duration. Finally, in 2017, Arkansas passed a third reduction in its maximum UC duration. As a result of these state law changes, depending on state unemployment, the shortest potential UC maximum duration is currently 12 weeks (in Florida and North Carolina), compared with 26 weeks prior to 2011.\nChanges in UC benefit duration have consequences for the duration of federal unemployment benefits that may be available to unemployed workers, including Extended Benefits (EB) and benefits from the now-expired Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC08) program. Because state UC benefit duration is an underlying factor in the calculation of duration for additional federal unemployment benefits, reducing UC maximum duration also reduces the number of weeks available to unemployed workers in the federal extended unemployment programs (including EUC08, which is now expired, and EB).\nPrior to the expiration of the EUC08 program on December 28, 2013 (December 29, 2013, in New York), states were temporarily subject to a \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule (under P.L. 111-205, as amended), which made the availability of federally financed EUC08 benefits contingent on not actively changing the state\u2019s method of calculation for UC benefits, if it would have decreased weekly benefit amounts. Some states, however, make automatic adjustments to weekly benefit amounts under existing state law. Consequently, when these states experience certain conditions, such as a decrease in the average weekly wage used in the automatic adjustment calculation, their maximum weekly UC benefit amount may have been decreased without having violated the now-expired \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule. P.L. 112-96 provided a specific exception to the \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule in the case of state legislation enacted before March 1, 2012. In February 2013, North Carolina enacted legislation that actively reduced UC weekly benefit amount calculations beginning in July 2013. Due to this violation of the \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule, EUC08 benefits were no longer available in North Carolina, effective June 29, 2013. All EUC08 benefits expired as of the week ending on or before January 1, 2014 (i.e., December 28, 2013; or December 29, 2013, in New York State). Any reduction to the UC weekly benefit amount also translates into reduced EB weekly benefit amounts (and EUC08 benefit amounts when the program was authorized). \nOverall, the two types of changes to state UC laws and programs have consequences for the duration and amount of unemployment benefits. This report describes these changes and analyzes their consequences for UC, EUC08 (when it was authorized), and EB benefits. It will be updated, as needed, to reflect additional state UC changes.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41859", "sha1": "7ce2aae1110e406536e40cd714a93083147f0afc", "filename": "files/20180307_R41859_7ce2aae1110e406536e40cd714a93083147f0afc.html", "images": {} }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41859", "sha1": "12ff2aad87ac0fa28759d1b32620d95e2d767835", "filename": "files/20180307_R41859_12ff2aad87ac0fa28759d1b32620d95e2d767835.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4888, "name": "Unemployment Insurance" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 455458, "date": "2016-08-31", "retrieved": "2016-11-28T21:41:30.642936", "title": "Unemployment Insurance: Consequences of Changes in State Unemployment Compensation Laws", "summary": "This report analyzes recent changes to state Unemployment Compensation (UC) programs. Two categories of UC state law issues are considered: (1) changes in the duration of state UC unemployment benefits, and (2) changes in the UC weekly benefit amount.\nIn recent years, some states have enacted legislation to decrease the maximum number of weeks of regular state UC benefits. Until 2011, all states paid at least up to 26 weeks of UC benefits to eligible, unemployed individuals. In 2011, however, six states passed legislation to decrease their maximum UC benefit durations: Arkansas, Florida, Illinois (only for calendar year 2012), Michigan, Missouri, and South Carolina. In 2012, Georgia also passed legislation to decrease the maximum UC benefit duration. In 2013, Kansas and North Carolina enacted similar legislation. Subsequently, in 2015, Arkansas and Missouri enacted additional state laws to further reduce their maximum UC durations. (As of this publication date, however, the Missouri Supreme Court found the 2015 Missouri law unconstitutional; therefore, this further UC duration reduction is not currently in effect.) As a result of these state law changes, depending on state unemployment, the shortest potential UC maximum duration is currently 12 weeks (in Florida and North Carolina), compared with 26 weeks prior to 2011.\nChanges in UC benefit duration have consequences for the duration of federal unemployment benefits that may be available to unemployed workers, including Extended Benefits (EB) and benefits from the now-expired Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC08) program. Because state UC benefit duration is an underlying factor in the calculation of duration for additional federal unemployment benefits, reducing UC maximum duration also reduces the number of weeks available to unemployed workers in the federal extended unemployment programs (including EUC08, which is now expired, and EB).\nPrior to the expiration of the EUC08 program on December 28, 2013 (December 29, 2013, in New York), states were temporarily subject to a \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule (under P.L. 111-205, as amended), which made the availability of federally financed EUC08 benefits contingent on not actively changing the state\u2019s method of calculation for UC benefits, if it would have decreased weekly benefit amounts. Some states, however, make automatic adjustments to weekly benefit amounts under existing state law. Consequently, when these states experience certain conditions, such as a decrease in the average weekly wage used in the automatic adjustment calculation, their maximum weekly UC benefit amount may have been decreased without having violated the now-expired \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule. P.L. 112-96 provided a specific exception to the \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule in the case of state legislation enacted before March 1, 2012. In February 2013, North Carolina enacted legislation that actively reduces UC weekly benefit amount calculations beginning in July 2013. Due to this violation of the \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule, EUC08 benefits were no longer available in North Carolina, effective June 29, 2013. All EUC08 benefits expired as of the week ending on or before January 1, 2014 (i.e., December 28, 2013; or December 29, 2013, in New York State). Any reduction to the UC weekly benefit amount also translates into reduced EB weekly benefit amounts (and EUC08 benefit amounts when the program was authorized). \nOverall, the two types of changes to state UC laws and programs have consequences for the duration and amount of unemployment benefits. This report describes these changes and analyzes their consequences for UC, EUC08 (when it was authorized), and EB benefits. It will be updated, as needed, to reflect additional state UC changes.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41859", "sha1": "7fbf6eae84eb3547550b7f96dcddb40f18c8f7a8", "filename": "files/20160831_R41859_7fbf6eae84eb3547550b7f96dcddb40f18c8f7a8.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41859", "sha1": "3049e5f1079ebb00b91d52b7550c53e5aee7ca2e", "filename": "files/20160831_R41859_3049e5f1079ebb00b91d52b7550c53e5aee7ca2e.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4888, "name": "Unemployment Insurance" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 434917, "date": "2014-08-19", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T20:10:39.871734", "title": "Unemployment Insurance: Consequences of Changes in State Unemployment Compensation Laws", "summary": "This report analyzes recent changes to state Unemployment Compensation (UC) programs. Two categories of UC state law issues are considered: (1) changes in the duration of state UC unemployment benefits, and (2) changes in the UC weekly benefit amount.\nOver the past several years, some states have enacted legislation to decrease the maximum number of weeks of regular state UC benefits. Until recently, all states paid at least up to 26 weeks of UC benefits to eligible, unemployed individuals. In 2011, however, six states passed legislation to decrease their maximum UC benefit durations: Arkansas, Florida, Illinois (only if certain program criteria are met across different calendar years), Michigan, Missouri, and South Carolina. In 2012, Georgia also passed legislation to decrease the maximum UC benefit duration. In 2013, Kansas and North Carolina enacted similar legislation.\nChanges in UC benefit duration have consequences for the duration of federal unemployment benefits that may be available to unemployed workers, including Extended Benefits (EB) and benefits from the now-expired Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC08) program. Because state UC benefit duration is an underlying factor in the calculation of duration for additional federal unemployment benefits, reducing UC maximum duration also reduces the number of weeks available to unemployed workers in the federal extended unemployment programs (including EUC08, which is now expired, and EB).\nPrior to the expiration of the EUC08 program on December 28, 2013 (December 29, 2013, in New York), states were temporarily subject to a \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule (under P.L. 111-205, as amended), which made the availability of federally financed EUC08 benefits contingent on not actively changing the state\u2019s method of calculation for UC benefits, if it would have decreased weekly benefit amounts. Some states, however, make automatic adjustments to weekly benefit amounts under existing state law. Consequently, when these states experience certain conditions, such as a decrease in the average weekly wage used in the automatic adjustment calculation, their maximum weekly UC benefit amount may have been decreased without having violated the now-expired \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule. P.L. 112-96 provided a specific exception to the \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule in the case of state legislation enacted before March 1, 2012. In February 2013, North Carolina enacted legislation that actively reduces UC weekly benefit amount calculations beginning in July 2013. Due to this violation of the \u201cnonreduction\u201d rule, EUC08 benefits were no longer available in North Carolina, effective June 29, 2013. All EUC08 benefits expired as of the week ending on or before January 1, 2014 (i.e., December 28, 2013; or December 29, 2013, in New York State). Any reduction to the UC weekly benefit amount also translates into reduced EB weekly benefit amounts (and EUC08 benefit amounts when the program was authorized). \nOverall, the two types of changes to state UC laws and programs have consequences for the duration and amount of unemployment benefits. This report describes these changes and analyzes their consequences for UC, EUC08 (when it was authorized), and EB benefits. It will be updated, as needed, to reflect additional state UC changes.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41859", "sha1": "c0eec395c4e9c1813803d1e4a97a8b13fcfdad2a", "filename": "files/20140819_R41859_c0eec395c4e9c1813803d1e4a97a8b13fcfdad2a.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41859", "sha1": "c9ed8b463365a21a624cea56485e0195e61fb794", "filename": "files/20140819_R41859_c9ed8b463365a21a624cea56485e0195e61fb794.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 3938, "name": "Unemployment Insurance" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc272019/", "id": "R41859_2013Oct30", "date": "2013-10-30", "retrieved": "2014-02-03T19:46:03", "title": "Unemployment Insurance: Consequences of Changes in State Unemployment Compensation Laws", "summary": "This report analyzes several types of recent changes to state Unemployment Compensation (UC) programs. Three categories of UC state law issues are considered: (1) changes in the duration of state UC unemployment benefits; (2) changes in the UC weekly benefit amount; and (3) the enactment into state law of two trigger options for the Extended Benefit (EB) program.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20131030_R41859_41ead0932eb25ee08c86028cea378c43262e562c.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20131030_R41859_41ead0932eb25ee08c86028cea378c43262e562c.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Unemployment insurance", "name": "Unemployment insurance" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Workers' compensation", "name": "Workers' compensation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Employee benefit plans", "name": "Employee benefit plans" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc811230/", "id": "R41859_2012Aug15", "date": "2012-08-15", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Unemployment Insurance: Consequences of Changes in State Unemployment Compensation Laws", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20120815_R41859_ca10a1804e6db39c687d0110d4ef41b0d2a4fdbe.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20120815_R41859_ca10a1804e6db39c687d0110d4ef41b0d2a4fdbe.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc808419/", "id": "R41859_2011Aug05", "date": "2011-08-05", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Unemployment Insurance: Consequences of Changes in State Unemployment Compensation Laws", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20110805_R41859_96ce2a440fd6b0b679bc146aff6bd308043de0f5.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20110805_R41859_96ce2a440fd6b0b679bc146aff6bd308043de0f5.html" } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [ "Constitutional Questions", "Domestic Social Policy" ] }