1. The language is included as amendments to HR 133. The total bill language is over 5,500 pages. The section on Coronavirus relief is from pages 1924 to 2467 of the link below.
2. The bill confirms that PPP (Paycheck Protection Program Loans) expenses are tax deductible, even if forgiven.
3. The FFCRA(Families First Coronavirus Relief Act) paid sick leave and paid family leave benefits, with payroll tax credits to offset the costs, is extended from December 31, 2020; to March 31, 2021. This applies to employers with less than 500 employees. Employers with 500 or more employees are still responsible for paid sick leave under AB 1867, which automatically extends to March 31, 2021.
4. Eligible expenses under a PPP loan are expanded, some items are "Covered Worker Protection Expenditures" such as COVID safety equipment; and "Group life, disability, vision, or dental insurance".
5. The borrower of a PPP loan can choose their "covered period" of expenses, either 8 or 24 weeks from loan origination.
6. Payroll tax deferrals are extended from April 30, 2021; to January 1, 2022.
7. For loan forgiveness applications, there will be a 1 page application for loans under $150,000; and no additional information shall be required.
8. For loans over $150,000; the SBA(Small Business Administration) will now be required to present new audit procedures for loan forgiveness, within 45 days of the passage of the act. Hopefully this will help avoid having to use the form 3509, to justify business necessity.
9. New PPP loans will become available, with more restrictions to apply for. There will also be a process to ask for an increased loan.
10. Stimulus payments will be sent to individuals, at $600 per person.
11. Unemployment compensation and assistance to states will be extended, with a $300 boost to unemployment payments, through March 14, 2021.

1. Are they extending the paid sick leave provisions of the FFCRA(Families First Coronavirus Relief Act), which are due to expire on December 31, 2020? Those provide tax credits to reimburse the costs for employers with less than 500 employees to provide paid sick leave or paid family leave due to COVID-19 issues. If these provisions are extended, then the provisions of AB 1867 automatically are extended, which requires California employers with 500 or more employees to provide paid sick leave, without a tax credit to reimburse it. The new Cal/OSHA regulations on COVID-19 require paid sick leave for those employees who are a "COVID case" or had a "potential exposure" to a "COVID case".
2. Are they providing clear definition that expenses paid for under a PPP(Paycheck Protection Program) loan be tax deductible, if the loan is forgiven? The latest guidance said no.
3. They appear to be providing new PPP loans, but with many more requirements to apply for the loans.
4. What are the new unemployment relief provisions?

1. Certified Tire and Services Centers, Inc. This California appellate ruling was published on October 14, 2018. It held that Certified Tires incentive pay program was legal. The case was appealed to the state Supreme Court. That court held the case, while it was first ruling in Oman v. Delta, another incentive pay case. That case was decided June 29, 2020. The court said Delta's incentive pay programs with 4 different options was legal. Due to the way airlines operate, it is hard to compare a typical construction industry incentive pay program to the Delta program. The state Supreme Court was supposed to next rule on Certified Tire. Unfortunately, on September 23, 2020; that court sent Certified Tire back to the Appellate Court, advising them to reconsider their decision, per the parameters of legality that the Oman v. Delta ruling gave. The state Supreme Court sadly vacated the Certified Tire decision, until that ruling is revised. CALPASC will be issuing an amicus brief that we hope will give clarity to legal incentive pay programs in California.
   • You can click here for a copy of the Certified Tire original ruling.
   • You can click here for a copy of the Oman v. Delta ruling.
   1. Liberty Mutual v. Bosa Development. This federal court ruling expanded the definition of "occurrence" under a wrap-up insurance policy, to the detriment of general contractors and subcontractors. CALPASC will be issuing an amicus brief in November 2020 on this very important case.
   2. Smith v. Pulte. This California appellate ruling was unpublished, but would remove significant protections against class action construction defect lawsuits for builders and subcontractors in residential construction. Pulte is requesting the state Supreme Court to review this case, as the Appellate ruling was quite flawed. CALPASC will be issuing a letter requesting the state Supreme Court to review. You can click here for a copy of the unpublished ruling.

In the meantime:

For AB 1867, the CA Labor Commissioner's office issued the poster required for employers with 500 or more employees, as well as revised information on Paid Sick Leave for those employers.

You can click here to see a copy of the document.

You can click here to see the revised guidance for Paid Sick Leave.

For SB 1159, employers will need to notify their workers' compensation claims administrators within three business days of an employee who they know or reasonably should have known that the employee tested positive for COVID-19, from the effective date of the legislation, September 17, 2020 going forward. CALPASC members can review the alert below, and see item 9 on the requirements for reporting. We will discuss the retroactive part on the webinar, for which the employer has until October 17, 2020; to file.

CALPASC members can click here for the original alert we gave on SB 1159.

CALPASC members can click here for a copy of the bill as passed.

1. In Alfredo Sanchez, et al., v. Miguel A. Martinez, the Third Appellate District ruled that Martinez(a farm labor contractor) owed Sanchez and the other aggrieved employees both premium hours and PAGA penalties for failing to separately pay for rest periods under a piece rate pay system. It didn't matter to the court whether or not the employees took their rest periods, Labor Code Section 226.2 requires all rest periods to be separately compensated when the employee is being paid a piece rate. You can read a copy of the ruling by clicking here. 
2. In David Murray v. UPS Capital Insurance Agency, Inc. the Fourth Appellate District ruled that in certain circumstances, insurance brokers who have expertise in an area may be held to a higher standard for procuring the correct coverage. Murray shipped computer equipment through UPS and was advised to take out coverage through the UPS insurance agency, but the policy did not provide coverage when UPS damaged his equipment. You can read a copy of the ruling by clicking here. 

1. AB 1577-Burke. This bill removes from California Income Tax any loan amounts forgiven under the federal Paycheck Protection Programs loans. You can click here to see how the bill changes current law.
2. AB 1867-Committee on Budget. The provisions of this bill were placed in a budget trailer bill, which means it was not heard by policy committee. This is an unfair way the legislature gets around true debate. The bill provides Paid Sick Leave similar to the federal FFCRA for employers with 500 or more employees. The bill does not, however provide for extended family leave as per FFCRA. You can see Section 4, establishing new Labor Code 248.1 click here.
3. AB 2257-Gonzalez. This bill adds new exceptions for independent contractors under previous AB 5, but also makes some minor changes to the business to business relationship qualifications. CALPASC members may want to review revised section 276 of the Labor Code to see if any service providers may be eligible to conduct business for them as an independent contractor. You can click here to review.
4. SB 1447-Bradford. This bill provides that a qualified employer(defined as employing 100 or fewer employees as of December 31, 2019; and had gross receipts reduce by 50% or more for the period April 1, 2020 through June 30, 2020; as compared to the same quarter in 2019) can apply for a hiring tax credit. You can review the bill by clicking here, and would probably want to discus with your CPA if you believe you qualify.

The Wage and Hour division issued revisions in response to a lawsuit against the FFCRA( Families First Coronavirus Response Act), which provides paid sick leave and extended family and medical leave provisions for employees of employers with less than 500 employees.

CALPASC members can click here to see a copy of the DOL notice, which summarizes the 5 revisions.

CALPASC members can also review the document that will be officially published on September 16, 2020. The information begins on page 6, click here to view the document.