Sunday, May 18, 2008

What's the status of H.B. 1804? (part 2)

Back on March 6, I attended an immigration seminar held at the local Vo-Tech center. The purpose of the seminar was to inform local Oklahoma businesses of the stipulations in the law and how to comply with them.

There was a great deal of good information given during the seminar. For instance, I learned for the first time of the national E-Verify system for confirming the employment status of a prospective employee. As per section 7 of the law, after July 1st, 2008, Oklahoma businesses and contractors may not enter into contract with any government entity unless such company is registered with E-Verify. The specific provision reads as follows:

SECTION 7. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1313 of Title 25, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

A. Every public employer shall register with and utilize a Status Verification System as described in subparagraphs a or b of paragraph 1 of Section 6 of this act to verify the federal employment authorization status of all new employees.

B. 1. After July 1, 2008, no public employer shall enter into a contract for the physical performance of services within this state unless the contractor registers and participates in the Status Verification System to verify the work eligibility status of all new employees.

2. After July 1, 2008, no contractor or subcontractor who enters into a contract with a public employer shall enter into such a contract or subcontract in connection with the physical performance of services within this state unless the contractor or subcontractor registers and participates in the Status Verification System to verify information of all new employees.

This section of the law was, as of March 6, being challenged in the Oklahoma courts on behalf of the Oklahoma Chambers of Commerce. I have no knowledge of any resolution to this dispute, of any court injunction or anything of the sort.

Another section of the law is also under review by the courts as part of the same lawsuit. Namely, Section 9, which reads:

SECTION 9. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 2385.32 of Title 68, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

A. If an individual independent contractor, contracting for the physical performance of services in this state, fails to provide to the contracting entity documentation to verify the independent contractor's employment authorization, pursuant to the prohibition against the use of unauthorized alien labor through contract set forth in 8 U.S.C., Section 1324a(a)(4), the contracting entity shall be required to withhold state income tax at the top marginal income tax rate as provided in Section 2355 of Title 68 of the Oklahoma Statutes as applied to compensation paid to such individual for the performance of such services within this state which exceeds the minimum amount of compensation the contracting entity is required to report as income on United States Internal Revenue Service Form 1099.

B. Any contracting entity who fails to comply with the withholding requirements of this subsection shall be liable for the taxes required to have been withheld unless such contracting entity is exempt from federal withholding with respect to such individual pursuant to a properly filed Internal Revenue Service Form 8233 or its equivalent.

C. Nothing in this section is intended to create, or should be construed as creating, an employer-employee relationship between a contracting entity and an individual independent contractor.

This and one other lawsuit (filed on behalf of another entity which I failed to note) challenging the constitutionality of the law on grounds of unfairness and discriminatory practices comprise the two remaining challenges which currently stand in the way of full enactment of all provisions of Oklahoma's H.B. 1804, due to take effect, as per sections 7 and 9, July 1, 2008.

Other than the preceding useful information, the remainder of the time allotted to the presentation of the seminar basically amounted to a lot of complaining about the insolence exhibited by the Oklahoma Legislature when it was advised (by the presenter of the seminar) that this was a bad law for Oklahoma and its pursuit must be abandoned. Thankfully Randy Terrill and the body of the Oklahoma Legislature roundly rejected this advice, noting that "our constituents are demanding this piece of legislation be enacted," an answer which the speaker implied was untruthful. Apparently he isn't aware of all the polls taken on the question which consistently result in a 70% favorable attitude toward the law among legal citizens of Oklahoma -- the only kind that matter.

If memory serves I've covered most of the information gleaned from the seminar. However, if something I've missed comes to mind, I'll add it as an update.

0 comments: