idx
int64 0
3.7k
| table_id
stringclasses 48
values | column_num
int64 0
7
| column_name
stringclasses 94
values | column_dtype
stringclasses 3
values | jurisdiction
stringclasses 53
values | jur_abb
stringclasses 53
values | question_context
stringclasses 48
values | question
stringlengths 65
516
| answer
stringlengths 0
1.62k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
600 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Mississippi | MS | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Mississippi charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
601 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Montana | MT | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Montana charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
602 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | North Carolina | NC | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of North Carolina charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
603 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | North Dakota | ND | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of North Dakota charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
604 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Nebraska | NE | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Nebraska charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
605 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | New Hampshire | NH | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of New Hampshire charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
606 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | New Jersey | NJ | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of New Jersey charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
607 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | New Mexico | NM | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of New Mexico charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
608 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Nevada | NV | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Nevada charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
609 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | New York | NY | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of New York charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
610 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Ohio | OH | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Ohio charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
611 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Oklahoma | OK | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Oklahoma charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
612 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Oregon | OR | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Oregon charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
613 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Pennsylvania | PA | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Pennsylvania charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
614 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Puerto Rico | PR | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Puerto Rico charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
615 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Rhode Island | RI | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Rhode Island charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
616 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | South Carolina | SC | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of South Carolina charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
617 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | South Dakota | SD | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of South Dakota charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
618 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Tennessee | TN | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Tennessee charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
619 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Texas | TX | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Texas charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
620 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Utah | UT | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Utah charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
621 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Virginia | VA | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Virginia charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
622 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | US Virgin Islands | VI | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of US Virgin Islands charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
623 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Vermont | VT | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Vermont charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
624 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Washington | WA | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Washington charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
625 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Wisconsin | WI | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Wisconsin charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
626 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | West Virginia | WV | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of West Virginia charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
627 | 2-7 | 0 | charges_base_period_employers_in_inverse_chronological_order | bool | Wyoming | WY | CHARGING BASE-PERIOD EMPLOYERS IN INVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER—Some states limit charges to base-period employers but charge them in inverse order of employment. This method combines the theory of charging the most recent employer and the theory that charges should bear some relation to the amount of wages earned by the worker. Responsibility for the unemployment of a claimant is assumed to lessen with time. A maximum limit is placed on the amount that may be charged any one employer; when the limit is reached, the next previous employer is charged. The limit is usually fixed as a fraction of the wages paid by the employer or as a specified amount in the base period or in the quarter, or as a combination of the two. Usually, the limit is the same as the limit on the duration of benefits in terms of quarterly or base-period wages. If a worker’s period of unemployment is short, or if the last employer in the base period employed the individual for a considerable part of the base period, charging employers in inverse chronological order gives the same results as charging the last employer in the base period. If a worker’s period of unemployment is long, such charging gives much the same results as charging all base-period employers proportionately. All the states that provide for charging in inverse order of employment have determined, by regulation, the order of charging in case of simultaneous employment by two or more employers. | Does the state of Wyoming charge the _base-period employers in inverse chronological order_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | False |
628 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Hawaii | HI | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Hawaii charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
629 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Indiana | IN | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Indiana charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | Law also provides for charges to BP employers in inverse order |
630 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Kansas | KS | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Kansas charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
631 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Louisiana | LA | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Louisiana charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
632 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Maryland | MD | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Maryland charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | Principal employer will be charged for shut-downs for convenience; employers participating in shared work will bear all charges |
633 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Minnesota | MN | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Minnesota charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
634 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Mississippi | MS | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Mississippi charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
635 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Missouri | MO | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Missouri charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | Charges omitted for employers who employed individual less than 28 days or paid individual less than $400 |
636 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Montana | MT | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Montana charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
637 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | New Jersey | NJ | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of New Jersey charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
638 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | New Mexico | NM | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of New Mexico charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
639 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | North Carolina | NC | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of North Carolina charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | Amount charged to a BP employer's account is the benefit allocated to such employer multiplied by 120% |
640 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | North Dakota | ND | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of North Dakota charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
641 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Ohio | OH | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Ohio charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
642 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Oklahoma | OK | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Oklahoma charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | If employer recalls a laid-off or separated employee and the employee continues to be employed, or voluntarily terminates employment or is discharged for misconduct within the BY, benefit charges may be reduced by the ratio of remaining weeks of eligibility to the total weeks of entitlement |
643 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Oregon | OR | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Oregon charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
644 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Pennsylvania | PA | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Pennsylvania charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
645 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Tennessee | TN | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Tennessee charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
646 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Texas | TX | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Texas charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
647 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Utah | UT | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Utah charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
648 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Vermont | VT | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Vermont charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
649 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | US Virgin Islands | VI | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of US Virgin Islands charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
650 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Washington | WA | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Washington charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | Charged to separating employer for certain quits with good cause |
651 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | West Virginia | WV | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of West Virginia charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
652 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Wisconsin | WI | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Wisconsin charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | Benefits are not charged to an employer constituting less than 5% of an individual's BPW |
653 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Wyoming | WY | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Wyoming charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | True |
654 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Alabama | AL | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Alabama charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | X |
655 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Arizona | AZ | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Arizona charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | X |
656 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Arkansas | AR | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Arkansas charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | X |
657 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | California | CA | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of California charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | X |
658 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Connecticut | CT | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Connecticut charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | Charges omitted for employers who paid individual less than $500 |
659 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Delaware | DE | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Delaware charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | X |
660 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | District of Columbia | DC | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of District of Columbia charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | X |
661 | 2-8 | 0 | details | str | Florida | FL | CHARGING IN PROPORTION TO BASE-PERIOD WAGES—On the theory that unemployment results from general conditions of the labor market more than from a given employer’s separations, the largest number of states charge benefits against all base-period employers in proportion to the wages earned by the worker with each employer. Their charging methods assume that liability for benefits is inherent in the wage payments creating the worker’s eligibility. (Note that states combining this method with charging the most recent employer are listed in Table 2-6, States that Charge Most Recent or Principal Employer.) | Does the state of Florida charge the _all employers in proportion to base-period wages_ for benefits paid when a worker becomes unemployed? | Charges omitted for employers who paid worker less than $100 |
662 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Alaska | AK | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Alaska allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
663 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Alabama | AL | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Alabama allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
664 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Arkansas | AR | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Arkansas allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
665 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Arizona | AZ | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Arizona allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
666 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | California | CA | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of California allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
667 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Colorado | CO | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Colorado allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
668 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Connecticut | CT | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Connecticut allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
669 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | District of Columbia | DC | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of District of Columbia allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
670 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Delaware | DE | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Delaware allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
671 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Florida | FL | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Florida allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
672 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Georgia | GA | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Georgia allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
673 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Hawaii | HI | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Hawaii allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
674 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Iowa | IA | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Iowa allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
675 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Idaho | ID | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Idaho allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
676 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Illinois | IL | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Illinois allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
677 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Indiana | IN | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Indiana allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
678 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Kansas | KS | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Kansas allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
679 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Kentucky | KY | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Kentucky allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
680 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Louisiana | LA | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Louisiana allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
681 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Massachusetts | MA | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Massachusetts allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
682 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Maryland | MD | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Maryland allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
683 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Maine | ME | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Maine allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
684 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Michigan | MI | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Michigan allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
685 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Minnesota | MN | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Minnesota allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
686 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Missouri | MO | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Missouri allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
687 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Mississippi | MS | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Mississippi allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
688 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Montana | MT | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Montana allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
689 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | North Carolina | NC | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of North Carolina allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
690 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | North Dakota | ND | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of North Dakota allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
691 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Nebraska | NE | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Nebraska allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
692 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | New Hampshire | NH | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of New Hampshire allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
693 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | New Jersey | NJ | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of New Jersey allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
694 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | New Mexico | NM | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of New Mexico allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
695 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Nevada | NV | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Nevada allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
696 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | New York | NY | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of New York allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
697 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Ohio | OH | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Ohio allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | True |
698 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Oklahoma | OK | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Oklahoma allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
699 | 2-13 | 0 | permits_rate_reduction_through_voluntary_contributions | bool | Oregon | OR | RATE REDUCTION THROUGH VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS—About half of the states provide for employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions. Federal law requires that voluntary contributions be made earlier than 120 days after the beginning of the rate year, though some states establish earlier due dates. Since federal law restricts refunds to only erroneous payments, if a voluntary contribution does not lead to a reduced rate or if an employer later changes their mind, no refund can be made. In reserve-ratio states (refer to Table 2-3, Reserve-Ratio Formula States), a voluntary contribution increases the balance in the employer’s reserve, resulting in a lower rate being assigned that will save more than the amount of the voluntary contribution.
In benefit-ratio states (refer to Table 2-4, Benefit-Ratio Formula States), an employer pays voluntary contributions to cancel benefit charges to its account, thereby reducing its benefit-ratio. | Does the state of Oregon allow employers to obtain lower rates by making voluntary contributions? | False |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.