This proposed rule amends the reference in s.
Tax 11.93
to increase the annual filing standard to $600 (currently $300) to allow more retailers to file sales tax returns annually. This is consistent with changes made to s.
77.58 (1) (a)
, Stats., by
2013 Wis. Act 20
, to allow more retailers to file sales tax returns less frequently (quarterly rather than monthly).
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation
There is no existing or proposed federal regulation that is intended to address the activities to be regulated by the rule.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Illinois (86 ILL. Adm. Code 130.502), Iowa (Rule 701 12.1(422)), and Minnesota (Rule 8130.7300) also address sales tax filing frequency in their rules. As with Wisconsin, each of these state's rules are based on unique underlying statutes and policy. Because of this, a meaningful comparison cannot be made.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
2013 Wis. Act 20
doubled the threshold upon which a monthly sales tax return is required to be filed ($600 to $1200). The department has created this proposed rule order to be consistent with this statutory change by doubling the threshold upon which an annual sales tax return may be filed ($300 to $600). No other data was used in the preparation of this proposed rule order or this analysis.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business
This rule order makes changes to reflect current law and current department policy. It makes no policy or other changes having an effect on small business.
Anticipated Costs Incurred by Private Sector
This proposed rule does not have a fiscal effect on the private sector.
Effect on Small Business
This proposed rule does not affect small business.
Agency Contact Person
Please contact Dale Kleven at (608) 266-8253 or
dale.kleven@revenue.wi.gov
if you have any questions regarding this proposed rule.
Text of Rule
SECTION 1.
Tax 11.93 (1) and (Note 2) are amended to read:
Tax 11.93 (1) A retailer holding a regular seller's permit who during the previous calendar or fiscal year had a sales and use tax liability not exceeding
$300
$600
will be notified by the department that it must only file one sales and use tax return for the following year. If the retailer wants to continue to file returns on a quarterly basis, it must contact the department.
(Note 2) The interpretations in s.
Tax 11.93
are effective under the general sales and use tax law on and after September 1, 1969, except: (a)
The
A
$300 standard
applies
applied
to taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 1979. Prior to that date, a $100 standard applied;
and
(b) The "annual information return" was eliminated for 1981 and subsequent years, pursuant to
Chapter 221, Laws of 1979
.
; and (c) The $600 standard applies on and after January 1, 2014.
SECTION 2. Effective date. This rule shall take effect on the first day of the month following publication in the Wisconsin Administrative Register as provided in s.
227.22 (2) (intro.)
, Stats.
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
FISCAL ESTIMATE
AND ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
|
Type of Estimate and Analysis
|
X
Original
⍽
Updated
⍽
Corrected
|
Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
|
Chapter Tax 11 – Sales and use tax
|
Subject
|
Sales tax filing frequency
|
Fund Sources Affected
|
Chapter 20 , Stats. Appropriations Affected
|
⍽
GPR
⍽
FED
⍽
PRO
⍽
PRS
⍽
SEG
⍽
SEG-S
|
|
Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
|
⍽
No Fiscal Effect
⍽
Indeterminate
|
⍽
Increase Existing Revenues
X
Decrease Existing Revenues
|
X
Increase Costs
X
Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget
⍽
Decrease Costs
|
The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
|
⍽
State's Economy
X
Local Government Units
|
⍽
Specific Businesses/Sectors
⍽
Public Utility Rate Payers
|
Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million?
⍽
Yes
X
No
|
Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
|
The rule does not create or revise policy, other than to reflect current law and department policy.
|
Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
|
As indicated in the attached fiscal estimate, the proposed rule would decrease state sales and use taxes by $1.7 million (non-recurring loss) in FY14 and decrease county and stadium sales and use taxes by $140,000 (non-recurring loss) in FY14.
No comments concerning the economic effect of the rule were submitted in response to the department's solicitation.
|
Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
|
Clarifications and guidance provided by administrative rules may lower the compliance costs for businesses, local governmental units, and individuals.
If the rule is not implemented, Chapter Tax 11 will be incomplete in that it will not reflect current law or department policy.
|
Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
|
No long-range implications are anticipated.
|
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
|
N/A
|
Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota
)
|
N/A
|
FISCAL ESTIMATE FORM
|
|
2013 Session
|
X
ORIGINAL
⍽
UPDATED
|
LRB #
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION #
|
|
⍽
CORRECTED
⍽
SUPPLEMENTAL
|
Admin rule #
|
Tax 11: Sales Tax Filing Frequency
|
Subject
Proposed order of the Department of Revenue relating to sales tax filing frequency
|
|
Fiscal Effect
|
State:
⍽
No State Fiscal Effect
Check columns below only if bill makes a direct appropriation or affects a sum sufficient appropriation
⍽
Increase Existing Appropriation
⍽
Increase Existing Revenues
⍽
Decrease Existing Appropriation
X
Decrease Existing Revenues
⍽
Create New Appropriation
|
X
Increase Costs — May be Possible to Absorb Within Agency's Budget
X
Yes
⍽
No
⍽
Decrease Costs
|
Local:
⍽
No Local Government Costs
|
1.
⍽
Increase Costs
|
3.
⍽
Increase Revenues
|
5. Types of Local Governmental Units Affected:
|
⍽
Permissive
⍽
Mandatory
|
⍽
Permissive
⍽
Mandatory
|
⍽
Towns
⍽
Villages
⍽
Cities
|
2.
⍽
Decrease Costs
|
4.
⍽
Decrease Revenues
|
X
Counties
X
Others
|
Stadium Districts
|
⍽
Permissive
⍽
Mandatory
|
⍽
Permissive
⍽
Mandatory
|
⍽
School Districts
⍽
WTCS Districts
|
Fund Sources Affected
⍽
GPR
⍽
FED
⍽
PRO
⍽
PRS
⍽
SEG
⍽
SEG-S
|
Affected Ch. 20 Appropriations
|
Assumptions Used in Arriving at Fiscal Estimate:
The proposed rule modifies Chapter
TAX 11
of the Administrative Code regarding the requirements for quarterly and annual sales and use tax filing. Currently, a registered business with an annual sales and use tax liability not exceeding $300 must only file sales and use tax returns on an annual basis. If the retailer prefers to file on a quarterly basis, it must contact the department. The proposal would increase the $300 threshold to $600, allowing more businesses to file sales and use tax returns on an annual basis. The change to the filing threshold would be effective January 1, 2014.
Based on information from state sales and use tax returns, the rule change is expected to affect 8,091 filers. While the proposal does not impact tax liabilities, sales tax returns for quarters ending March 31 and June 30 would be due Dec 31 of the next fiscal year. Assuming all affected businesses file on an annual basis, the proposal would result in a $1.7 million non-recurring loss in FY14.
County and stadium sales and use taxes were 8.2% of state sales and use taxes in FY13. Assuming this does not change, county and stadium taxes would decrease by $140,000 (non-recurring loss) in FY14.
Notice of Hearings
Safety and Professional Services — Board of Nursing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Board of Nursing in sections 15.08 (5) (b) and 227.11 (2), Wis. Stats., and interpreting section 441.07, Wis. Stats., the Board of Nursing will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to repeal section
N 7.04
, amend section
N 7.01 (2)
, repeal and recreate section
N 7.03
, and create section
N 7.02 (1m)
, relating to code of conduct.
Hearing Information
Date:
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Time:
8:05 a.m.
Locations:
1400 East Washington Avenue
Room 121 A
Madison, Wisconsin
Appearances at the Hearing and Comments
Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received at or before the public hearing to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Copies of Rule
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Safety and Professional Services
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
The Board of Nursing has general agency authority to promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statue enforced or administered by the Board of Nursing.
The Board also has specific agency conferred by the legislature to promulgate rules for its own guidance and for the guidance of the profession and define and enforce professional conduct and unethical practices.
Related statute or rule
Plain language analysis
Section 1 amends the statement of intent to include certificate due to the disciplinary action may be taken against an advanced practice nurse prescriber certificate.
Section 2 provides a definition for certificate.
Section 3 creates a new section defining the grounds for disciplinary action
Section 4 repeals s.
N 7.04
which defined unprofessional conduct. This proposed rule combines the negligence and unfit to practice section with the unprofessional conduct section to make one section identifying the grounds for disciplinary action.
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation
None.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Illinois:
The grounds for disciplinary actions in Illinois include: findings of unethical or unprofessional conduct which includes engaging in behavior that crosses professional boundaries; sexual conduct; deceiving, defrauding, or harming the public; and departure from or failure to conform to the standards of professional or practical nursing. In addition, Illinois incorporates be reference the "Code for Nurses with Interpretive Statements" and "Standards of Practice and Educational Competencies of Graduates of Practical/Vocational Nursing Programs."
Iowa:
The grounds for disciplinary actions in Iowa include: behavior which constitutes knowingly making misleading, deceptive, untrue or fraudulent representations in the practice of a profession; behaviors which constitutes unethical conduct; behavior which constitutes fraud; behavior which constitutes knowingly making misleading, deceptive, untrue or fraudulent representations; and professional incompetency.
Michigan:
The grounds for disciplinary actions in Michigan include: personal disqualifications; practicing outside the scope; unprofessional conduct; fraud or deceit; obtaining, possessing or attempting to obtain a controlled substance; and unethical business practices.
Minnesota:
The grounds for disciplinary actions in Minnesota include: non-compliance with requirements; practicing outside the scope; criminal convictions; violating confidentiality; engaging in conduct with a patient that is sexual or may reasonably be interpreted as sexual; obtaining money, property or services from a patient through the use of undue influence; engaging in fraud or deceit; failing to or inability to perform professional or practical nursing with reasonable skill and safety; engaging in unprofessional conduct; actual or potential inability to practice nursing with reasonable skill and safety; engaging in any unethical conduct; improper management of patient records; and improper supervision.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The Board of Nursing reviewed the recently adopted model rules of the National Council of State Boards of Nursing and the surrounding states as well as utilizing knowledge of current minimum standards to determine what would be in the best interest of the state of Wisconsin when setting forth the practices which constitute grounds for discipline.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of economic impact analysis
These rules were posted for economic comments for a 14 day period and no comments were received.
Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis
The Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis is attached.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis or Summary
These proposed rules do not have an economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s.
227.114 (1)
, Stats. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by email at
Tom.Engels@wisconsin.gov
, or by calling (608) 266-8608.
Agency Contact Person
Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 151, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708; telephone 608-261-2377; email at
Sharon.Henes@wisconsin.gov
.
STATE OF WISCONSIN
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
DOA-2049 (R03/2012)
|
Division of Executive Budget and Finance
101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor
P.O. Box 7864
Madison, WI 53707-7864
FAX: (608) 267-0372
|
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis
|
|
1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
|
X
Original
⍽
Updated
⍽
Corrected
|
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
|
N 7
|
3. Subject
|
Misconduct or unprofessional conduct
|
4. Fund Sources Affected
|
5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
|
⍽
GPR
⍽
FED
X
PRO
⍽
PRS
⍽
SEG
⍽
SEG-S
|
20.165(1)(g)
|
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
|
X
No Fiscal Effect
⍽
Indeterminate
|
⍽
Increase Existing Revenues
⍽
Decrease Existing Revenues
|
⍽
Increase Costs
⍽
Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget
⍽
Decrease Cost
|
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
|
⍽
State's Economy
⍽
Local Government Units
|
⍽
Specific Businesses/Sectors
⍽
Public Utility Rate Payers
⍽
Small Businesses
(if checked, complete Attachment A)
|
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million?
⍽
Yes
X
No
|
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
|
The policy problem addressed by the rule is to update and modernize the misconduct or unprofessional conduct rule which has not been updated since 1995.
|
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
|
This rule was posted for 14 days for economic comments and none were received.
|
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
|
None
|
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
|
This rule will not have an economic or fiscal impact on specific businesses, business sectors, public utility rate payers, local governmental units or the state's economy as a whole. The rule addresses conduct of the licensee.
|
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
|
The benefit of implementing the rule is including current minimum standards of the profession necessary for the protection of the public. In addition, as a member state of the Nurse Licensure Compact, the benefit is to have consistency among the compact states as to what practices are construed as misconduct or unprofessional conduct.
The alternate to updating and modernizing the misconduct or unprofessional conduct rule is to continue with a current rule that creates uncertainty to the licensee as to what is misconduct or unprofessional conduct when a situation arises involving technology, practices or laws that were not in place in 1995.
|
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
|
The long range implication is notice provided to the licensees and public as to what constitutes unprofessional conduct.
|
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
|
None
|
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota
)
|
The grounds for disciplinary actions in our neighboring states include: behavior which crosses professional boundaries; sexual conduct; fraud; departure from or failure to conform to the standards of nursing; practicing outside the scope; obtaining, possessing or attempting to obtain a controlled substance outside the practice of nursing; unethical business practices; criminal convictions; violating confidentiality; obtaining money, property or services from a patient through the use of undue influence; failing to or inability to perform nursing with reasonable skill and safety; engaging in unethical practices; improper management of patient records; and improper supervision.
|
17. Contact Name
|
18. Contact Phone Number
|
Sharon Henes
|
(608) 261-2377
|
This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.
Notice of Hearings
Safety and Professional Services — Board of Nursing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Board of Nursing in sections 15.08 (5) (b), 227.11 (2); 441.01; 441.50 (6); 441.50 (6 ) (c), Wis. Stats., and interpreting section 441.50, Wis. Stats., the Board of Nursing will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to create Chapter
N 9
, relating to nurse licensure compact
Hearing Information
Date:
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Time:
8:00 a.m.
Locations:
1400 East Washington Avenue
Room 121A
Madison, Wisconsin
Appearances at the Hearing and Comments
Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received at or before the public hearing to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Copies of Rule
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Safety and Professional Services
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
An examining board shall promulgate rules for its own guidance and for the guidance of the profession to which it pertains. The Board may establish rules to prevent unauthorized persons from practicing professional nursing. The Board shall approve all rules for the administration of ch.
441
, Stats., in accordance with ch.
227
, Stats.
The Board shall have the authority to promulgate uniform rules and regulations which are developed by the nurse licensure compact administrators. These uniform rules shall be adopted by party states.
Related statute or rule
Plain language analysis
Wisconsin is a party state to the Nurse Licensure Compact. The Nurse Licensure Compact requires the adoption of the uniform rules for facilitation and coordination of the implementation of the Nurse Licensure Compact. The issues the rules address include: issuance of a multi-state license; limitations or discipline on a multi-state licensure; required data to collect (and who has access to that data); and various reporting to the information system requirements.
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation
None.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Illinois:
Illinois is not part of the nurse licensure compact.
Iowa:
Iowa is part of the nurse licensure compact and has adopted these rules.
Michigan:
Michigan is not part of the nurse licensure compact.
Minnesota:
Minnesota is not part of the nurse licensure compact.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
The nurse licensure compact administrators approve the uniform rules.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of economic impact analysis
These rules were posted for economic comments for a 14 day period and no comments were received.
Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis
The Fiscal Estimate and Economic Impact Analysis is attached.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis or Summary
These proposed rules do not have an economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s.
227.114 (1)
, Stats. The Department's Regulatory Review Coordinator may be contacted by email at
Tom.Engels@wisconsin.gov
, or by calling (608) 266-8608.
Agency Contact Person
Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator, Department of Safety and Professional Services, Division of Policy Development, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 151, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708; telephone 608-261-2377; email at
Sharon.Henes@wisconsin.gov
.
STATE OF WISCONSIN
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
DOA-2049 (R03/2012)
|
Division of Executive Budget and Finance
101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor
P.O. Box 7864
Madison, WI 53707-7864
FAX: (608) 267-0372
|
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis
|
1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
|
X
Original
⍽
Updated
⍽
Corrected
|
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
|
N 9
|
3. Subject
|
Nurse Licensure Compact
|
4. Fund Sources Affected
|
5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
|
⍽
GPR
⍽
FED
X
PRO
⍽
PRS
⍽
SEG
⍽
SEG-S
|
20.165(1)(g)
|
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
|
X
No Fiscal Effect
⍽
Indeterminate
|
⍽
Increase Existing Revenues
⍽
Decrease Existing Revenues
|
⍽
Increase Costs
⍽
Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget
⍽
Decrease Cost
|
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
|
⍽
State's Economy
⍽
Local Government Units
|
⍽
Specific Businesses/Sectors
⍽
Public Utility Rate Payers
⍽
Small Businesses
(if checked, complete Attachment A)
|
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million?
⍽
Yes
X
No
|
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
|
Wisconsin is a party of the Nurse Licensure Compact. The Nurse Licensure Compact requires the adoption of the uniform rules for facilitation and coordination of implementation of the compact.
|
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
|
This rule was posted for economic impact comments for 14 days and none were received.
|
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
|
None
|
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
|
This rule will not have an economic or fiscal impact on specific businesses, business sectors, public utility rate payers, local governmental units or the state's economy as a whole.
|
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
|
The benefit of implement the rules is our continued participation in the Nurse Licensure Compact. The Nurse Licensure Compact allows nurses to practice across state lines. If Wisconsin were removed from the Nurse Licensure Compact, for failure to implement the uniform rules, there would be an economic impact on the state and nurses license in Wisconsin would be ineligible to practice out of state under their Wisconsin license.
|
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
|
The long range implication of implementing the rule is continual participation in the Nurse Licensure Compact.
|
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
|
None
|
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota
)
|
Iowa is a member of the Nurse Licensure Compact and have adopted the uniform rules. Illinois, Michigan and Minnesota are not current party states to the Nurse Licensure Compact.
|
17. Contact Name
|
18. Contact Phone Number
|
Sharon Henes, Administrative Rules Coordinator
|
(608) 261-2377
|
This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.
