R5F-Amend Chapter 62 Domestic Partnerships - Employment Benefits -Gongora-COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
An Ordinance Amending The Code Of The City Of Miami Beach By Amending Chapter 62, Entitled "Human
Relations," By Amending Article Ill, Entitled "Domestic Partnerships," By Amending Sec 62-128 To Add Sec. 62-
128(d) To Provide Tax Equity To City Employees With Domestic Partners Enrolled In The City's Health And Dental
Plans Who Currently Bear A Disproportionate Tax Burden Over That Of Their Married Counterparts.
Ke Intended Outcome Su orted:
Attract and maintain a workforce of excellence. Promote and celebrate our City's diversity.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.):
~3.8% of employees agree or strongly agree that they would recommend the City as a place to work. 93% of
~mployees agree or strongly agree that they are proud to be a City employee. The City has 68 employees who
~re registered with the City's Human Resources Department as having a domestic partner. Of these registered
~omestic partners, only 19 have elected to enroll in the City's medical and/or dental coverage or in the IAFF
Health Trust Plan.
Item Summary/Recommendation:
FIRST READING PUBLIC HEARING
The City offers health benefits to all general employees and their legal dependents through a self funded insurance
plan and also contributes to both, the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) Health Trust and the
Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) Health Trust plans. Currently, the FOP Health Trust does not provide coverage for
registered domestic partners. Under current Internal Revenue Service (IRS) guidelines, employees who provide
medical and dental coverage for their registered domestic partner are not eligible to take advantage of before-tax
payroll contributions for their premium share of their domestic partners coverage and are responsible to report, as
additional earnings, the value of the premium cost paid for this coverage by their employer.
To correct this tax inequality, the City could increase the employee's pay an amount equal to the tax liability
incurred by the employee for the domestic partner's medical and dental coverage.
Adviso Board Recommendatioo:
At their April 25, 2013 meeting, the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (FCWPC) recommended the
reimbursement of the federal income tax liability for those employees with registered domestic partners who have
elected coverage under the City's medical and dental plans; and the notification to all employees of the City's
reimbursement, effective for the Fiscal Year 2013/14. In addition, the FCWPC directed the Administration to work
with the FOP Health Trust to encoura e the inclusion of re istered domestic artners.
Financial Information:
Source of ·~----r-------------~------------------------------------------, Amount Account
Funds: 1 $80,000 TO Be Determined in the FY 2013/14 Budget Process
c·~ r:::---2--+---------=-:::-::-:::-=----t-------------l
OBPI Total $80,000
Financial Impact Summary: Based on a current analysis of the total annual fiscal impact for refunding this
additional tax liability at current enrollment levels and premium costs is $53,850.36. It is estimated that the
enrollment for domestic partner health care coverage could increase by 40 percent with the change, resulting in an
annual cost to the Cit of a roximatel $80,000
City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking:
[ ----------------------------------------------~
Si n-Offs:
Assistant City Manager
--------------+---~~~~~----------~r-~--~~--7r---------· Jimmy L. Moral s
•
MIAMI BEACH 392
City Manager
AGENDA iTEM
DATE
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, \IIIWW.miamibeochfLgov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
First Reading
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and M mbers of tt~t:ommission
FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
DATE: May 8, 2013
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING T E CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 62, EN ITLED "HUMAN RELATIONS," BY AMENDING
ARTICLE Ill, ENTITLED "DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS," BY AMENDING SEC 62-
128 TO ADD SEC. 62-128(D) TO PROVIDE TAX EQUITY TO CITY EMPLOYEES
WITH DOMESTIC PARTNERS ENROLLED IN THE CITY'S HEALTH AND DENTAL
PLANS WHO CURRENTLY BEAR A DISPROPORTIONATE TAX BURDEN OVER
THAT OF THEIR MARRIED COUNTERPARTS.
BACKGROUND
At its June 12, 2012 meeting, the Miami Beach Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender
Business Enhancement Committee ("BEC") held a discussion regarding the heavier tax burden
for City of Miami Beach employees with registered domestic partners that elect to enroll their
domestic partner in the City's medical and dental health plans, over that of their married
counterparts. A motion was passed by the BEC recommending the City to reimburse the
additional income tax liability to these employees who bare a heavier tax burden for enrolling
their registered domestic partner in the City's sponsored health plans. This additional federal
income tax liability is not incurred by employees that have the right to marry who participate in a
medical plan sponsored by the City. Mayor Matti Herrera Bower referred the matter to the
FCWPC on March 13, 2013, for discussion and on November 30, 2012, a similar referral to the
FCWPC was made by Commissioner Michael Gongora.
This item was heard at the April 25, 2013 FCWPC meeting. The item was introduced and an
explanation of the additional tax liability incurred by employees providing health and dental
coverage for their registered domestic partners was provided. The item was then discussed by
the FCWPC who agreed the additional tax liability created tax inequities between employees
providing health and dental coverage for their legal spouse versus coverage provided by and
employee for their registered domestic partner.
The members of the FCWPC unanimously approved the Administration's suggested remedy,
correcting an inequality imposed by the Federal Government, by providing reimbursement of the
additional tax liability to those employees providing medical and/or dental coverage to their
registered domestic partner. By passing such an ordinance, the City would be correcting an
inequality imposed by the Federal Government, enhancing our City's message of embracing
and welcoming equality, diversity and no tolerance for discrimination. In addition, Employers
who offer the reimbursement also do so to attract the most talented labor pool for their
workforce.
393
City Commission Meeting May 8, 2013
Domestic Partnership Tax Credit
Page 2 of 7
ANALYSIS
Exclusions from taxable compensation for benefit costs provided by an employer are governed
by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Code. These requirements provide that, to be excluded
from paying federal income taxes on insurance benefits, the benefits must be provided to the
employee and their qualified tax dependent(s), as defined by IRS. Qualified tax dependents
include the employee's legal spouse and/or dependent children. For federal tax purposes,
domestic partners, both same or opposite sex, are not included in the IRS definition of a
"spouse", therefore tax benefits at the federal level do not exist for domestic partners (except in
rare instances where the domestic partner might also qualify as the employee's dependent).
Unless the domestic partner is the employee's qualified tax dependent, the premium paid by an
employer for domestic partner health care benefits is considered as income to the employee
and must be included as taxable income to the employee.
The City offers health benefits to all general employees and their legal dependents through a
self funded insurance plan. In addition, the City also contributes to both, the International
Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) Health Trust and the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) Health
Trust plans. The City provides health benefits coverage for an employee's registered domestic
partner, either same or opposite sex. In addition, the IAFF Health Trust also provides healthcare
coverage to registered domestic partners; however, the FOP Health Trust does not provide for
this benefit.
In accordance with IRS code, the employer's share of the premium cost for healthcare coverage
provided to a domestic partner is considered income and is therefore, subject to Federal Income
tax and Medicare tax withholdings. This cost is considered imputed income and is reported on
the employee's annual W-2 earnings statement. In addition, since the domestic partner is not
considered a qualified tax dependent under the IRS code, the employee's premium
contributions for the coverage provided to a domestic partner is deducted from their payroll
check as a post-tax contribution. An employee who enrolls his/her domestic partner for health
benefits has two (2) medical deductions, one for the employee's pre-tax premium payment
equivalent to the premium cost of "Employee Only" coverage and a second, post-tax deduction
for the domestic partner's post-tax premium payment, equivalent to the difference between the
"Employee Only" contribution rate and the contribution rate for 'Family" coverage. This post-tax
premium payment for the domestic partner's healthcare coverage is in addition to the
employee's federal tax liability for the City's premium payment for the domestic partner's
coverage.
The City provides a premium subsidy for all medical plans including the Self-Funded Health
Plan and the International Association of Fire Fighters (lAFF) Health Trust plan and the
Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) Health Trust plan. The attached spreadsheet ("Attachment A")
provides a summary of the City's current monthly premium costs and the monthly and annual
additional taxable income charged to an employee who has elected domestic partner healthcare
coverage for the Self-Funded Health plan and the IAFF Health Trust plan which, both provide
for registered domestic partnership healthcare coverage. This same formula is applicable to
dental insurance, as also referenced in the table. This taxable income is referred to as imputed
income and is equal to the difference between the City's premium contribution for "Employee
Only" coverage and the City's premium contribution for "Family" coverage.
394
City Commission Meeting May 8, 2013
Domestic Partnership Tax Credit
Page 3 of 7
ADMINISTRATION DUE DILIGENCE
To provide financial relief for the additional federal income tax liability for the coverage of a
domestic partner, the City could increase the employee's pay in an amount equal to the tax
liability incurred by the employee for the domestic partner healthcare coverage. Because the
employee's tax liability for the benefit is mandated by the IRS, the Administration wanted to be
certain that the City and the employee would not incur any legal or financial consequences for
providing a refund to the employee for this additional tax liability. To that end, the Administration
sought advice from its benefit plan consultant, Gallagher Benefit Services (GBS).
The benefits attorney for GBS has advised the Administration that adjusting an employee's
earnings to offset the additional tax liability is lawful because the City would still be in
compliance with the IRS code, as the employee would continue to incur the tax liability for the
value of the coverage for their domestic partner's healthcare coverage which would continue to
be reported on the employee's annual W2. The City's reimbursement of the tax liability would be
considered additional income to the employee and this additional income would be subject to
federal tax withholdings. The reimbursement offered to the employee by the City is considered a
taxable adjustment to the employee's pay -it is not a refund.
Since the employee's tax liability is a fixed bi-weekly cost based on their selected medical
and/or dental insurance pian, the tax liability can be calculated on a dollar-to-dollar basis to
determine the City's reimbursement.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
As of January 17, 2012, the City has 1 ,938 active full-time and part-time employees, 68
employees who are registered with the City's Human Resources Department as having a
domestic partner. Of the 68 registered employees, eleven (11) active and two (2) retirees have
elected to enroll in the City's medical and/or dental coverage and six (6) have elected coverage
in the IAFF Health Trust plan.
The attached schedule (Attachment "B") calculates the fiscal impact of implementing a bi-weekly
tax reimbursement to each of the aforementioned City employees with domestic partners
enrolled in their health benefits plan.
Based on the attached analysis, the City's total annual fiscal impact for refunding the
employee's additional tax liability for domestic partner coverage is $53,850.36. By order of
magnitude, if enrollment for domestic partner healthcare coverage increased by forty-percent
(40%), the City's annual cost for the reimbursement is estimated to be less than $80,000,
(based on current medical and dental premium costs).
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT ARE GROSSING UP 1
Three (3) other known municipalities offer reimbursement of the employee's income tax liability
for domestic partner coverage; San Francisco, California; Cambridge, Massachusetts; and the
1 Gross up means to increase a net amount to include deductions, such as taxes, that would be incurred by
the receiver.
395
City Commission Meeting May 8, 2013
Domestic Partnership Tax Credit
Page 4 of 7
City of Hallandale Beach, Florida. Additionally, the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser's
Office enacted a "grossing up" policy, making it the first known county agency in Florida to adopt
such a policy. Their adopted policies are as follows:
CAMBRIDGE, MA
Effective July 1, 2011, employees for the City of Cambridge, Massachusetts, who have same-
sex spouses, received an additional payment to cover federal taxation of the benefits coverage
the city provides those spouses.
The Cambridge action was in response to a January 10, 2011, City Council resolution ordering
a study of how the federal tax treatment of spousal benefits affects the benefits that the city
provides its employees and their spouses. It also ordered that the city find a way to ameliorate
the effect of the differential tax treatment for city employees with same-sex spouses.
On May 23, 2011, Cambridge City Manager, Robert W. Healy issued a letter stating that the
city's remedy for the disparity was to provide a quarterly stipend that is equal to twenty percent
(20%) of reported taxable income imputed to the employee for health and dental coverage. This
program began July 1, 2011, for non-union and management employees; for employees who
belong to unions, the city could implement the stipend as part of new contracts when they are
negotiated.
CITY OF HALLANDALE BEACH. FLORIDA
At its November 7, 2012, City of Hallandale Beach Commission meeting, a resolution was
adopted by the Mayor and City Commission, approving a tax equity reimbursement program for
domestic partnerships, authorizing the City Manager to take the necessary action to implement
the program. The tax equity solution offers City of Hallandale Beach employees who enroll their
domestic partners under the City's health insurance plan with a $500 tax equity reimbursement
to mitigate the impact of the additional imputed income tax. A tax equity reimbursement
application is required to be filed with its Human Resources Department on May 1st of every
year that that the additional tax was deducted.
City of Hallandale Beach was the first city in the State of Florida to implement a tax equity
reimbursement program.
PALM BEACH COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER GARY R. NIKOLITS. FLORIDA
The Palm Beach County Property Appraiser's Office implemented a policy to offset the
additional taxes paid by employees who elect to provide health insurance to their domestic
partners. The action was taken upon the request of the Palm Beach County Human Rights
Council.
The policy, which went into effect in January 2013, provides employees who elect to insure their
domestic partners with a tax equity reimbursement of twenty dollars ($20) on a bi-weekly basis,
aimed at mitigating the impact of the additional imputed income tax.
Palm Beach County Property Appraiser Gary R. Nikolits is the first elected constitutional officer
in Florida to implement a tax equity program. His office has offered domestic partnership health
insurance since 2004.
396
City Commission Meeting May 8, 2013
Domestic Partnership Tax Credit
Page 5 of 7
Currently no state agencies offer grossing up. However, two (2) other Florida government
agencies are in the process of implementing grossing up polices including, the City of West
Palm Beach and the Palm Beach County Tax Collector's Office.
PRIVATE SECTOR POLICIES
As of December 2012, TD Bank announced that it will begin offsetting the tax burden that its
employees pay for domestic partner benefits. Other private employers who have implemented
similar programs include: American Express, Apple, Bank of America Corp., Cisco Systems Inc,
Corning, Biogen Corp., Facebook, Goldman Sachs, Google, Kimpton Hotels, Microsoft, Morgan
Stanley and Yahoo!.
It is important to note, in discussion with each of the entities who have enacted a reimbursement
program to their employees providing health care coverage for a domestic partner, none have
experienced a significant increase in the number of employees enrolling their domestic partner
in health care coverage.
COMPUTING THE GROSS UP AMOUNT
In processing the tax reimbursement for an employee providing medical coverage for their
registered domestic partner, the Administration deliberated how it could determine the
appropriate reimbursement in order to make the employee financially whole. In other words,
Administration calculated the difference in Federal Income taxes paid by an employee who is
legally married and purchasing the City's medical and/or dental plan coverage for their spouse;
and, an employee purchasing the City's medical and dental plan for their registered domestic
partner. In order to determine this liability, multiple scenarios were processed within the payroll
database for each employee whose domestic partner was enrolled in the City's medical and/or
dental plans as follows:
• Scenario One (1) - A sample employee's enrollment was processed as if they were
electing medical and dental coverage for their legally married spouse; providing them
with "Family Medical" coverage. As the spouse is considered a tax dependent by the
IRS, there is no additional tax liability to the employee for the spouse's coverage. In this
scenario, the employee's bi-weekly contribution is pre-tax. Therefore, an employee's tax
liability is reduced because their pre-tax premiums reduce their taxable wages.
• Scenario Two (2) - A sample employee's enrollment was processed as if they were
electing medical and dental coverage for their registered domestic partner. Pre-tax
contributions were taken for "Employee Only" coverage and post-tax deductions were
taken for the difference of "Employee Only" coverage and "Family" coverage for the
registered domestic partner. Furthermore, the additional tax liability, or "Imputed
Income" incurred by the employee for the City's cost for the registered domestic
partner's coverage (this cost is equal to the difference between the City's costs for
Employee Only" and "Family" coverage) was included in the employee's earnings as
imputed income.
The employee's tax liability was determined by subtracting the employee's net pay as described
in Scenario Two (2), from their net pay in Scenario One (1 ). It is important to note that the
Administration made no changes in the employee's W2 election, the only difference is the
change in enrollment from domestic partner to spouse. Using this method provides the
397
City Commission Meeting May 8, 2013
Domestic Partnership Tax Credit
Page 6 of 7
employees with the most accurate determination of the actual extra tax liability. An example of
this payroll process can be viewed in Attachment "C".
The sample employee depicted in Attachment "C" would receive a bi-weekly reimbursement of
$142.92, which is the total federal income tax liability for electing medical and dental coverage
for their registered domestic partner.
Grossing-up the Gross-up
It is important to note, the bi-weekly reimbursement amount, or the gross-up, is subject to
federal income tax, as well. In an effort to make the employee whole, the gross-up amount
should be grossed-up to consider the additional tax liability to the employee. To determine this
additional tax liability, each employee whose domestic partner was enrolled in City medical
coverage would have their payroll processed under a third scenario.
• Scenario Three (3) - A sample employee's enrollment was processed providing
coverage for their registered domestic partner; pre-tax contributions were taken for
"Employee Only" coverage and post-tax deductions were taken for the difference of
"Employee Only" coverage and "Family" coverage for the registered domestic partner.
The previously determined additional tax liability was included in the employee's
earnings as imputed income as well as the gross-up amount determined by subtracting
the employee's federal income tax liability under Scenario One (1) from their federal
income tax liability under Scenario Two (2).
The new gross-up of the gross-up amount would be determined by subtracting the employee's
federal income tax liability under Scenario Two (2) from their federal tax liability under Scenario
Three (3). This additional federal income tax liability of $37.80 would be added to the tax liability
from the difference of Scenario One (1) and Two (2) to create the total gross-up amount of
$180.72 to be reimbursed. A copy of this payroll process can be found in Attachment "C".
CONCLUSION
As recommended by the Administration, the FCWPC further recommends the resulting gross-up
of the gross-up amount in the three (3) scenarios referenced above be refunded on a bi-weekly
basis to employees who have elected medical coverage for their registered domestic partner.
This amount would be determined on an annual basis, beginning with the employee's first
payroll check of the City's Fiscal Year, which begins on October 1st of each calendar year. Said
reimbursement would remain unchanged until a new fiscal year begins. The estimated annual
fiscal impact of grossing up is $80,000 based on current enrollment and insurance premium
costs. If approved, the Administration will notify all employees of the City's reimbursement of
the cost of providing coverage for their domestic partner during the City's annual open
enrollment and prior to the beginning of the City's fiscal year.
In addition, at the request of the FCWPC, the Administration will work with the FOP Health Trust
to encourage them to provide medical coverage to their members with registered domestic
partners.
JLM//KGB/CMG/SR/CD
T:\AGENDA\2013\May 8\Domestic Parnter Tax Credit Memo.docx
398
"Attachment A"
Determination of Imputed Income
399
Determination of lnputed Income
Exludes FOP H~alth Trust as they cvrreot!y do not provide health benefits for domestic partners
Medical Plan.
Medical
Plan
Standard HMO
Premium HMO.
Standard PPO
Premium PPO
POS
IAFF Health Trust*
Standard HMO
Premium HMO
Standard PPO
Premium PPO
POS
lAf'F Health Trust;~
Dental
PPO
OHMO
PPO
DHMO
Employee Only Coverage
Total Monthly Employee City
Premium PaYs Pays
$464.56 $1.34.72 $329.84
$7!33.48 $381.74 $381.74
$902.42 $261.70 $640.72
$1,527,13() $763,.90 $763.90
$850.12 $4Z5.06 $425.06
$522.02 $40.00 $482.02
Employee's Taxable Monthly Imputed
Income
The difference of the City's cost for Family
coverage vs Employee Only Coverage
family Coveage less Equals lmpvted
Employee Only coveage Income
$679.60-$329.84"" $349.76
$946.40-$3£;11 .74::: $564.66
$1,306.64-4640.72"' $665,92
$1,874.46-$763.90"" $1 '110.56
$1,054.86-$425.06 :;;> $629.80
$1,174,15.$482.02"' $692.13
Standard HMO
Premium HMO
Standard PPO
Premium PPO
POS
fAFF Health Trust"
Monthly Annual
Imputed Imputed
lncom~;t fncoma
Taxed as Taxed as
Earnings Earnings
$349.76 $4,197.12
$564.66 $6,175.92
$665.92 $7,9f;1.04
$1,110.56 $13,326,72
$629.80 $7,557.60
$692.13 $8,305.56
Dental Plan
Employe& Only Coverage
Total Monthly Employee. City
Premium Pays Pays
$20.08 $10.04 $10.04 PPO
$7.38 $3.69 $3.69 OHMO
Employee's Taxable Monthly Imputed
Income
The difference of the City's cost for F;:~mily
coverage vs Employee Only Coverage
Mt:mthly Annt~ai
Imputed Imputed
fncome Income
EmplOyee + 1 coverage less t:quals Imputed Taxed as Taxed as
Employee Only coveage income Earnings Earnln~s
$19 .. 35 •. $10.04 = $9.31 $9.31 $111.72
$6.45.$3.69 "'$2.76 $:2.76 $33.12
Family Coverage
Total
Monthly Employee City
Premium Pays Pays
$1,151.86 $472.26 $679,60
$1,892.80 $946.40 $946.40
$2.214.134 $908.00 $1,306.64
$3,748.B2 $1,874.46 $1,874.46
$2,109.72 $1,054.86 $1,054.86
$1,248.65 $74.50 $1,174.15
Employee + 1 Cov~rage
T ota! E ! Ct'+t' Monlh!y mp oyee ,,
Premium Pays Pays
$3/UO $19.35 $19.:35
$12.90 $6.45 $6A5
"Includes premium Gost for dentaL The IAFF Health Trust medica1 and dental benefits are bundled ln one plan.
400
&I Attachment 8"
Computing the Gross up Amount Spreadsheet
401
~ 0 f\) Computing the Gross up Scenarlo2 Sceenario3 · Additional Federallncome and Medicare Additional income tax paid paid by the Scenarto 1 Tax liability for employees providing employee for the total amount Federal tncome and Medicare Tax medical coverage for a registered reimbursed for their additlonal.Federal liability for married employees domestic partner Income and Medicare Tall Difference Difference Difference Federal Federal Scenario 2 · .. Federal Scenario 3 Scenario 3 tncom:eTax Medicare l{)tal Withholding Medicare Total over . WithhOlding Medica rtf Tota~ over over Employee f'aii.f Tax Paid Withholding Tax Paid Tax Paid Withholding Scenario 1* 1 TaxPaid ' Tax Paid Witllhotding Scenario 2** Scenario 1 ,...., 1 $506.33 $46.91 $553.24 $1141.41 $54.75 $696.16 $142.9:! $677.14 $55.'82 $7:i3.96 $37.80 2 $81.06 $19,5.5 $100.61 $159.16 $27.10 $186.26 $85.65 $172 . .Cl1 $28.35 $200.36 $14.10 3 $21.9.41 $26.63 $256.04 $359.59 $34.18 $393,77 $137.73 $394.0Z. $36.18 $430;20 $36.43 4 $274.37 $33.24 $307.61 $405.23 $40.83 $446.06 $138.45 $439.85 $42:84 $482li9 $36.63 5 $1,317.99 $63.84 $1,381.83 $1,469.29 $71.67 $1,540.96 $159.13 $1,513.85 $73.98 $1.587JB $46.87 6 $200.17 $24.75 $224.92 $30335 $32.30 $335.65 $110.73 $364.78 $34.29 $399.01 $63.42 7 $934.05 $59.48 $1,003.53 $941.87 $fi9.89 $1.1.111. 76 $8.23 $944.18 $70,00 $1;014.18 $2A2 8 $111.75 $19.S9 $151;'64 $H2.99 $20.01 $153.00 $1.36 $133.20 $20.1)3 $153.23. $0.23 9 $169.97 $2.4.34 $194.31 $174.16 $24.75 $198.91 $4.60 $174.!)4 $24~81 $199.65 $0.74 10 $895.79 $78.78 $975.57 $905.47 $79.22 $984.69 $9.12 $908.03 $79:36 $987.39 $2.70 11 $33.91 $3V:l9 $£5.80 $55.54 $34.00 $89.54 $23.74 $5£1:10 $34.35 $93.45 $3.91 12 $776.11 $63.67 $839.78 $816.89 $65,78 $882.67 $42.8.9 .$828.90 $66.41 $895.31 $12.64 13 $753.14 $59.66 $812.80 $869.20 $65.67 $934.87 $122.07 $903,38 $67.44 $970.82 $35.95 14 $751..£6 $64.84 $816.50 $79:t44 $66.95 $859,39 $42.89 $804.44 .$67;58 $872.02 $12.63 1.5 $1,096.98 $85.89 $11132..87 $1,319.76 $97.42 $1,417.18 $234.31 $1,385.37 $100.82 $1,48!5.19 $69.01 15 $227.01 $26.56 $25359 $357.:w $34.11 $39131 $137.72 $391.63 .$36.10 $4:27,73 $36.42. 17 $2.36.05 $27.47 $263.52 $368.98 $35.15 $404.13 $14'0.61 $404,14 $37;22 $441:36·· $37.23 18 $212.19 $51.03 $2.63.22 $315.32. $57.04 $372.36 $109.14 $343.23 $58.63 $401.86 $29.50 19 $434.45 $0;00 $434.45 $616.60 $0.00 $616.60 $182.15 $662.14 $0.00 .$6$2.14 $45.54 Bi-Weekly Total $1,833A4 $524.17 Annual Total $.44,002. 51 $12.580.13 -----~-·-·-------····-···-·-··---------~-----------·----~· '"This difference represents the additional Federal Income and Medicare Taxes paid bi·weekly by the employee providing coverage for thelr registered domestic partner versus the Federal lncome and Merlkare Taxes paid by employees providing medical coverage for the legal spouse, The Administration recommendes the reimb1,1rsement of thls additional cost to the employee. .$180.72 $99.75 $174.16 $175.1)8 $206.00 $174.15 $10.65 $1.59 $5.34 $11.82 $27.65 $55.53 $158.02 $55.52 $30332 $174.14 $177.84 $138.64 $221.69 $2,351.61 $53,850.36 *'Thls difference represents the additlonallncome tax paid paicj by the employee for the total amount reimbursed for the federal Income and Medkare Tax. The Administration recommendes the reimbursement of this additional cost to the employee. *"*Thls difference represents the total additional ferlerallncome and Medicare Tax paid by the employee providing coverage for their registered domestic partner. This reimbursement indudes the total amount of additional Federal Income and Medlcare Ta>tes paid pa!d by the employee for the domestic partner coverage, plus the amount of additional feder.ai Income and Medicare Taxes paid by the employee for the amount r-eimbursed. Thls is the total bi-weekly amount the Administration recommends to he reimbursed to employee's providing health care coverage fur their registered domestic partner; an annual co5t to the City .of $51,118.08 l
"Attachment C"
Sample Employee•s Payroll Processing Worksheets
403
~ 0 ~ Sample Employee Scenario 1 EARNlNGS SECTION Payroll Processing Report CITY Of MIAMl BEACH 1/14/2013 to ·1{2712013-1 Cycle bw DEDUCTIONS SECTION Type Hours/units Rate Amount Src Plan ~ ~~iol"!. BenefitfCont -----------Emp# ~ 1-"os # hol ltd reg SUN Appoint Tqtals: Home Dept; hoi ltd reg :S!lf\1 Totals 8.00 ~0.00 n.oo 80.{)0 80.00 8.00 80.00 72.00 80.00 80.00 349.03 0 3,490}}4 349.08 3,1190.84 p D p f>vt medcr rlppn2 loll moe mbmp mberp2 natwid bas'icl dep!f4 fmlfue Sa!<~ry: 3,490 . .84 Hourly: 43.():355 2,8t1tt27 3,235.36 3,49tL84 3,49tU34 3,490.84 Employees: 1 basic! dep!f4 dppn2 fmlfee fwt !Qchmoc rnberp. mbarp2 tnedcr natwld .2,8813,27 :;\,490.84 3,490.84 3,235.36 3.490.84 500.33 46.91 19.35 235.13 279.27 69.82 0.00 3.41 2.00 0.00 1 '163.22 3.41 2.00 19.35 506.33 236.13 279.27 ss.s<r 46.91 1,163.22 0.00 4$.!H !9.35 33!:Ul0 (H)Q 0.00 0.00 3.56 0,00 i.49 •HU1 3.56 Hl35 1.49 339.80 46:91 411.11 Page: 1 Status: .Active En1pluyees LEAVE SECTiON LvP!an Accrued Taken Banked ----s.~!JQn v.,.:gen 3.69 5.23 Lust C_ G~~~ ~:~~~:~ -------------_j S_.9Uil v_gen 3.69 5.23 r ----Gr~s$; 3,490.84 I Net 2,327.62 << No Errors I No Warnings >> ...._ _________________ ,. -------------------------------Page:1
~ 0 CJ1 Type Ernp# Pos # demd dornrn hol ltd re.g serv Appoint Totals: Sample Employee Scenario 2 EARNINGS SECTIOfl! Hoursfunlts ---·---0.00 8.00 80.00 72.00 80.00 80.00 R<"lte Home Dept: dumd 0.00 domm 0.00 hol 8.00 ltd 80.00 reg 72.00 serv 80.00 Totals f.HlOO Amount Src p p 349.08 I) p D p -3A90J34 349.08 3,400.84 Payroll Processing Report CITY OF MIAMI BEACH 1/14/2013 to '1/27/2013w1 Cycle bw DEOUCTlONS SECTION Page: 2 Status: Active Employees LEAVE SECTION Plan 6aseWag.es Deduction Benefit!Cont LvPlan Accrued Taken Banked Lost fwl medcr dppo1 !ohmcc mberp mberp2 natwid basic! dep1f4 dpdppo dplhmo fm!fee Snlary: 3,490.84 Hourly: •1:3.6355 3,426.62 3,1'75.7'! 3,490.84 3,490.84 3,490.84 Employees: 1 basic! dep!f4 <Jpdppo dp!hmo tippo\ fm!lee fwt !ohmoc mberp mberp2 meacr na!>vid 3.426.62 3.490.84 3.4~10.84 3,775.71 3.490.84 641.41 54.75 10.04 67.36 279.2.7 69.82 0.00 3.41 2.00 9.31 Hm.n 0.00 1,306.14 3.41 2.00 9.31 1StL77 10.04 &HAi 137.3£ 7.79.21' 69.82 54.75 1,306.14 0.00 54.75 HHl4 164.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.56 0.00 !l31 174.S8 1.49 418,95 s_gen V,j}en 3.69 5.23 [ -----····· -~:;~~ ~:~:~:~6 .... HHH •• I 3.56 s_gen 3.69 5.2$ 9.31 i74J38 10.04 1.49 164.~12 54./'!.i 418.95 v_gen I Gross: 3,490.84 I Net: 2.;Hl4.70 << Nq Errors !No Warnings >> --------·------·----------------------Page: 2
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING
THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH BY AMENDING
CHAPTER 62, ENTITLED "HUMAN RELATIONS," BY
AMENDING ARTICLE III, ENTITLED "DOMESTIC
PARTNERSHIPS," BY AMENDING SECTION 62-128,
ENTITLED "EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS" TO ADD SECTION
62-128(d) TO PROVIDE TAX EQUITY TO CITY EMPLOYEES
WITH DOMESTIC PARTNERS ENROLLED IN THE CITY'S
HEALTH AND DENTAL PLANS WHO CURRENTLY BEAR A
DISPROPORTIONATE TAX BURDEN OVER THAT OF THEIR
MARRIED COUNTERPARTS.
WHEREAS, the City provides health and dental coverage to all its general employees, their
legal dependents and registered domestic partners through a self-funded insurance plan; and
WHEREAS, the City contributes a portion of the cost of this coverage; and
WHEREAS, the City also contributes to health plans for both the Fraternal Order of Police
(FOP) and International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF); and
WHEREAS, only the legal spouse of an employee is recognized as a legal tax dependent
by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS);
WHEREAS, current federal tax law does not require employers, including the City, to tax
the employer and employee contributions to spousal health insurance coverage; and
WHERAS, registered domestic partners are not considered a legal spouse by the IRS; and
WHEREAS, current federal tax law require employers, including the City, to tax the value
of the employer cost of health and or dental coverage and the employee contributions for health
and or dental coverage for a registered domestic partner; and
WHEREAS, an unfair tax burden is thereby imposed upon City employees providing
medical and or dental coverage for their registered domestic partner; and
WHERAS, employees providing health and or dental coverage for their registered domestic
partner must pay more federal taxes than employees providing health or dental coverage for their
legal spouse for the same health insurance coverage; and
WHEREAS, effective October I, 2013, to provide tax equality to those employees
providing health and or dental coverage to their registered domestic partner the City will determine
an amount equal to the difference of the tax liability incurred by an employee providing health and
or dental coverage for their registered domestic partner of that of an employee providing health and
or dental coverage for their legal spouse; and
406
WHEREAS, this difference will be reimbursed to the employee via their bi-weekly payroll
check until such time as registered domestic partners are recognized as a legal dependent by the
IRS, the employee terminates health and or dental coverage for their registered domestic partner, or
he employee marries; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That Section 62-128 of Chapter 62 of the City Code is hereby amended as follows:
Chapter 62
HUMAN RELATIONS
* * *
Article III. Domestic Partnerships
* * *
Sec. 62-128.-Employment benefits.
(a) Employees shall be granted bereavement leave with pay for the death of a domestic
partner or family member of a domestic partner as set forth in the union contracts
governing city employees, Ordinance Nos. 1335 and 1613, and the city's administrative
policies. As to employees governed by union contracts, this benefit is contingent upon
approval of the benefit by the unions to the extent such approval is necessary.
(b) Employees shall be granted sick leave, family medical leave, or leave without pay to care
for a domestic partner as set forth in Ordinance Nos. 1335 and 1613 and the city's family
medical leave policy.
(c) Employees' domestic partners shall be allowed to be members of the city health plan as
set forth in the union contracts governing city employees, ordinances and the city's
administrative policies. As to employees governed by union contracts, this benefit is
contingent upon approval of the benefit by the unions to the extent such approval is
necessary.
(d) For so long a period as the federal tax code imposes a heavier tax burden upon city
employees who elect to provide health and or dental coverage for their registered
domestic partner, the city administration is authorized and directed to reimburse these
employees their total additional tax liability for said coverage. As to employees
governed by union contracts, this reimbursement is contingent upon the inclusion of
coverage for same and opposite sex domestic partners by the individual health plans.
SECTION 2. CODIFICATION.
407
It is the intention of the City Commission, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of
this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Code of the City of Miami Beach as
amended; that the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered to accomplish
such intention; and that the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section'1 or other appropriate
word.
SECTION 3. REPEALER.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances and all sections and parts of sections in conflict
herewith are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, subsection, clause or provision of this Ordinance is held invalid, the
remainder shall not be affected by such invalidity.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE
The effective date of this ordinance is October 1, 2013.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of ________ ,, 2013.
ATTEST:
Rafael E. Granado, City Clerk
Matti Herrera Bower
Mayor
F:\ATTO\ROSR\RFR CMB\Gay Committee\Domestic Partner Tax Credit Ordinance (4-29-13).docx
408
APPROVED AS TO
FORM& LANGUAGE
&FOR EXECUTION
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
409