Do You Qualify for Small Business Health Care Tax Credit?
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was enacted in March of 2010. One of the first provisions to go into effect from the Act is the small business health care tax credit. The purpose of the credit is to encourage small businesses to offer health insurance coverage to their employees for the first time or maintain coverage they have, and to help small businesses that employ primarily low- to moderate-income employees.
The IRS touts “three simple steps,” which can be found at http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/3_simple_steps.pdf, to determine if you qualify for credit in the 2010 tax year:
- Determine your total number of employees (not including owners or family members),
- Calculate the average annual wages of employees (not including owners or family members), and
- You pay at least half the insurance premium for employees at the single coverage rate.
If for 2010, your total number of employees is less than 25, the average annual wages is less than $50,000, and you satisfy #3, the credit is likely available to you. The maximum credit, which goes to employers with 10 or fewer full-time equivalent employees and annual average wages of $25,000 or less, is 35 percent of premiums paid by eligible small business and 25 percent of premiums paid by eligible tax-exempt organizations.
Eligible small businesses can claim the credit as part of the general business credit starting with the 2010 income tax return. For tax-exempt organizations, the IRS will issue further instructions on how to claim the credit.
Dan A. Penning
A Michigan State Police Lieutenant made news recently when he confirmed publicly a fact many have long suspected: in many places throughout the state, speed limits are set artificially low. Speed limits that are too low result in speeding tickets which equate to revenue for cash strapped local units of government. This assessment was then confirmed by a local police chief whose jurisdiction includes a stretch of one of the most heavily traveled roads in the state. As the road crosses into his city, the speed limit drops to a point that, as he admits, likely cannot be justified. The city has no intention of raising the speed limit, however, because of the revenue it generates for the city. A state lawmaker believes that the problem of artificially low speed limits has gotten so out of hand that he has introduced legislation that will force local communities to correct speed limits that are set too low. The question then becomes, how are speed limits set in the first place? 
The right to set speed limits is an exercise of the police power of the state and is therefore justified on the basis of public safety. Speed limits are intended to reflect a reasonable and safe speed that will facilitate the safe and orderly flow of traffic under normal conditions. Research has shown that the majority of motorists operate their vehicles in a safe and reasonable manner, hence, traffic laws and speed limits that reflect the behavior of the majority of motorists are the most successful. The inverse is also true: traffic laws and speed limits that arbitrarily restrict the majority of motorists encourage violations, lack public support and rarely achieve the desired result. Speed limits are not to be set based upon unreasoned opinion but upon thorough traffic engineering studies. Those studies include an analysis of such factors as the number and types of accidents that have occurred, the number of cars traveling the road, their speeds, the presence of pedestrians, the physical condition of the road surface, hills, curves, number of lanes, driveways, intersections, and so on.
While realistic speed limits are generally followed, unrealistic speed limits are not. Absent strict, continuous, and visible enforcement, artificially low speed limits will be ignored. And any adherence that does result is limited to the immediate time and immediate area of the enforcement (i.e., speed traps). If you find yourself getting a ticket in an area where the posted speed limit just doesn’t seem to make sense, you might consider asking the municipality for a copy of the traffic control order and the engineering studies upon which the speed limit was based. If the speed limit is not within 5 mph of the 85th percentile speed, and, no other unique and distinguishing factors exist, you just might have a defense. You might also want to keep an eye on the pending legislation.
On May 1, 2010, the “Dr. Ron Davis Smoke-Free Air Law” went into effect in Michigan. Smoking is now banned in most public buildings in Michigan and in outdoor areas where food or beverages are served, such as restaurant patios and porches.
As we approach the season of high-school proms, graduations and graduation open houses and parties, it is important to remember the basics concerning alcohol, minors and underage drinking. What may seem like a harmless or innocent circumstance in providing a minor with an alcoholic beverage can result in negative consequences lasting a lifetime to both the adult and the minor child.
The laws are simple. First, it is against the law for a person under the age of 21 to consume any alcoholic beverage or have any bodily alcohol content period. If a minor child is determined to have consumed an alcoholic beverage or have any bodily alcohol content, they can be charged with a misdemeanor leading to fines, court-ordered substance abuse counseling, and in the case of multiple violations or offenses, up to 90 days in jail. You may have heard that many police agencies have made enforcement of the “minor in possession laws” (”MIP”) a top priority. There is typically a zero tolerance by police officers who have reason to believe a minor has consumed or is in possession of alcohol.
The rules are simple. The consequences are clear. Underage individuals who drink alcohol, and the persons who provide them with the alcohol, will face severe consequences. It is important to keep these important facts in mind when planning your upcoming graduation celebrations.
Launching a boat in Michigan waters during the month of April is not very common. Boat insurance policies, however, generally begin to provide coverage on April 15. If you’ve not given much thought to your boat insurance policy, this spring might be a good time to review your policy and determine if you need more protection as you navigate the Great Lakes or Michigan’s inland lakes.
The valuation clause in the policy is what determines the calculation the insurance company uses to arrive at the amount to pay in the event of a loss. Actual cash value policies take into account depreciation, where other policies are written on the basis of “agreed value.” If the boat is a total loss, the policy holder of an “agreed value” policy receives the amount as provided in the policy, rather than the actual cash value. This coverage is not available from every insurance company.
Consider liability and bodily injury coverage that provides you with liability insurance coverage when there is damage to something owned by someone else or injury to someone else. Medical payments coverage pays for bills that may arise from an accident on a boat. Additional coverages may be available: uninsured boater’s insurance, roadside assistance (when towing your boat), trailer insurance, and coverage if you travel to Canada.
Over the last several years, Michigan has experienced extraordinary job loss. One fruit of those job losses has been an unusual number of business start-ups. All over the state, laid off workers have “reinvented” themselves, sometimes going back to school to pursue a different or more advanced degree, and sometimes going into business for themselves doing either the kind of work they have always done or something entirely new.
These online tools don’t replace the need for tax or legal counsel, but they can help you make better and more efficient use of both your time and our office, which in turn can save you money. If you are considering a new business venture or you need our assistance with a legal matter affecting your ongoing business, please contact any of the attorneys at Wright Penning & Beamer. We would be pleased to help you!
In 2008, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that a child’s ability to sue for a personal injury is not impaired despite any pre-injury waivers signed by the child’s parent. The case of Woodman v. Kera, L.L.C., 280 Mich. App. 125 (2008), involved a 5-year-old boy who was injured at an indoor recreation facility. The boy’s father had signed a pre-injury waiver, purporting to hold the recreation facility harmless if any injuries occurred to the child. According to the Court, the waiver could not prevent the child from pursuing a lawsuit against the facility. This conclusion was based on the common law rule that a parent lacks authority to waive, release, or compromise his or her child’s claims merely by virtue of the parental-child relationship. A parent, absent a specific exception created by the Michigan Legislature, cannot authorize an act that is detrimental to the child.
