Repository navigation
Conversation
Average each jurisdiction's SUTA default rate over the four quarter starts, so July-June rate years count each half. Give New Jersey its July-June employer UI rates and its employer TDI and workforce fund contributions, Rhode Island its 2019 Job Development Fund adjustment, and Alaska its employee UI contribution. Add published 2018-2026 histories for Alaska, Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey and Rhode Island, and the invariant test scaffold. Other jurisdictions follow. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Each curated jurisdiction's new-employer (default) rate and taxable wage base now carry dated values for 2018-2026 from statutes, session laws and agency notices, with per-state YAML tests. Ten jurisdictions (AR, DC, MD, MI, MO, ND, OK, VA, WV, WY) are still in research, so the jurisdiction invariants test fails until they land. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
… and GA/NE/WA readings - GA, HI, LA, MA, MN, MT, NM, UT, WA default rates: regenerate histories and references from statutes, session laws and agency notices. - HI: cite HRS 383-66, which gives new employers the .0000 reserve-ratio line. - MA: cite the Department's guide and contribution pages for the schedule in force; register the Section 14(i)(2) reading as an open candidate with captured texts. - Captures for the GA, NE, WA and MA candidates, plus the DOL 2023 table page. - YAML tests for LA, MN, MT, NM, UT and WA follow the new values. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
… Islands new-employer rate question Replace the dead NYSDOL IA 98 link with archived 2021 and 2022 rate pages and the February 2026 IA 98 notice. Cite Indiana DWD's employer handbooks for the 2020 to 2025 new-employer rates and its 2025 handbook for the wage base, and an archived Ohio JFS rates page for 2019 to 2022. Cite Virgin Islands Acts 8209 and 8827 beside Act 7410, and register us-vi:ui-new-employer-rate-payroll-variation as an open candidate, with captures under source_conflicts/sources/us-vi. Parameter values do not change. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The Legislature's Act 8209 PDF is a scan with a text layer, so the capture now records that layer through pdftotext instead of a separate OCR pass. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Section 308(b)(2)'s 2% stands from 2024 to 2026: Acts 8209 and 8827 left it in place, and VIDOL has published no other new-employer rate. Mark the candidate ruled. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
… wage bases - DC: 2.7% and $9,000 in every year, now cited to D.C. Code 51-103(c)(3)(A) and (e)(6), D.C. Law 12-175 and DOES notices for 2021-2026. DOES states only the rule for 2018 and 2019, so those two years rest on DOL's Significant Provisions reports. - Maryland: 2.6% (2018-2020), 2.3% (2021-2023), 2.6% (2024-2025) from the Division of Unemployment Insurance's yearly pages; 2.45% in 2026, after Labor and Employment 8-605.1(b)(2) subtracts 0.15% from each rate. The separate 0.15% administrative fee stays out. Base $8,500 (8-607(b)(1)). - Virginia: 2.5% under Va. Code 60.2-526(B) plus the pool cost and fund building charges: 2.51% (2018-2019), 2.50% (2020), 2.73% (2021-2022), 2.53% (2023), 2.50% (2024), 2.45% (2025-2026, after the budget's 0.05% shift to a separate administrative fee). Base $8,000 (60.2-229). - Register the Virginia 2018 rate (VEC's table says 2.53%; its pool row, the Governor's release and VEC's 2026 chart give 2.51%) as a ruled source conflict, with captures. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…stion Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The default rate adds the stabilization tax and, from July 1, 2023, the administrative assessment that replaced it, as the Division of Workforce Services counts them in the total tax rate: 3.2% for 2018-2019, 3.1% from 2020, 3.025% from July 2023, 2.025% from January 2024 and 2.0% from July 2024 (1.8% plus 0.2% from 2026). The bases follow Acts 734 (2017), 512 (2019), 368 (2021) and 196 (2023) and the agency's annual notices. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The 2018 and 2019 defaults add the obligation assessment that the Unemployment Insurance Agency put in each employer's total tax rate (Fact Sheet 146: it "will not be billed"): 2.7% plus 1.17% for 2018 and 1.16% for 2019, from the agency's formula and its 2019 rate table. The assessment ended after the fourth quarter of 2019. The base is the $9,000 that MCL 421.44(4) gives nondelinquent employers while the trust fund holds $2.5 billion (2018-2020, 2025-2026) and $9,500 otherwise (2021-2024). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Job Service North Dakota's annual rate schedules give the positive-balance rate for new nonconstruction employers (NDCC 52-04-05(6)(b)(1): 90% of the positive employer maximum rate or 1%) and the base (NDCC 52-04-03(3): 70% of the statewide average annual wage). Main had the 2024 values for every year. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
W.S. 27-3-503(f) gives a new employer its industry's average rate, at least 1%, plus the W.S. 27-3-505 adjustment factors. Department of Workforce Services figures (Legislative Service Office, June 2023) put experience-rated employers' average base rate at 0.63-0.96% for 2018-2023, so the default takes the 1% minimum plus the factors charged to new employers: 1.28, 1.22, 1.20, 2.28, 1.35 and 1.14%. For 2025 the department reports employers at the 10% maximum (8.5% plus the 1.5% factor cap), so new employers paid 2.5%; it published no factors for 2024 or 2026, which take the 1% minimum. The wage base follows the department's table, from $24,700 (2018) to $33,800 (2026). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
W. Va. Code 21A-5-5(b) sets 2.7% until an employer has 36 consecutive months of experience. From July 1, 2026, 21A-5-5(d) (2026 SB 1053) cuts each employer's otherwise applicable rate by seven percent, so a new employer pays 2.511% and the 2026 quarter average is 2.6055%. The same act's 21A-9-10 automation and administration fee is billed separately and stays out of the default. The wage base follows the pre-2024 threshold wage of 21A-1A-28 ($12,000 from 2009, $9,000 once the fund reached $220 million on a February 15) and WorkForce West Virginia's employer handbooks: $12,000 for 2018-2021, $9,000 for 2022-2023, $9,521 for 2024 and $9,500 from 2025, the fixed amount 2024 SB 841 wrote into 21A-1A-28(b)(1). Main had $9,521 in every year. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…n covers The jurisdiction selector read every jurisdiction's wage base and default rate at each instant. Once most histories began in 2018, a Minnesota household in 2014 failed on Alabama's missing value, although Minnesota's wage base reaches back to 2014. The selector now reads each parameter only for the jurisdictions that have people in the simulation. Two tests from main expected the old flat rates. Minnesota's new employer rate is now the 1% minimum in 2025 and the Department of Labor's 1.53% estimate in 2026; Missouri's 2026 rate is 2.376%, so the St. Louis employer total falls by $0.36. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
4 tasks done
…s reading 40 O.S. 1-223, as Senate Bill 911 amended it from November 1, 2025, picks the share by the conditional factor in place during the year and gives condition A 41.25% of the state's average annual wage. The Oklahoma Employment Security Commission's 2026 notice gives factor A and a $58,765.95 average annual wage, so the base is $24,200; the notice lists $25,000, the share condition A carried before the act. PE-US now follows the statute, and the candidate moves from open to ruled. A new candidate records the reading behind Wyoming's 2018-2023 default: W.S. 27-3-503(f)'s 1% minimum plus the 27-3-505 factors, against the Department of Workforce Services' averages for employers with the new employer rate (1.01% for 2023) and the totals in the Legislative Service Office's June 2023 Table 1. Text captures of the statute pages, the slides and the table go under source_conflicts/sources/us-wy. The Oklahoma candidate moves into alphabetical order. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This was referenced Nov 8, 2026
This was referenced Nov 8, 2026
The commit edits comments, one description and test names only. No parameter value, formula or test expectation changes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
MaxGhenis
marked this pull request as ready for review
November 8, 2026 18:58
The PR sets Oklahoma's 2026 taxable wage base at $24,200, Senate Bill 911's 41.25% share, and ok_ui_meets_alternate_wages_test compares base-period wages with the same parameter. Cases 4 and 5 now sit at that boundary, and Case 6 checks $24,999, between the statutory base and the $25,000 that OESC's notice lists. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Main stores one new-employer unemployment insurance (SUTA) rate for every year in each of the 53 jurisdictions PE-US models, and one taxable wage base for every year in 51 of them. Those bases match 2024's in every jurisdiction but Kansas. This PR gives each jurisdiction its 2018-2026 rates and bases and cites each value to the statute, session law, regulation or agency notice that sets it. The rate, the base or both change in 337 of the 477 jurisdiction-years, including the 2026 values of 41 jurisdictions. Alabama, California, DC, Florida, Indiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Dakota, Tennessee and Texas keep main's values in every year.
It also closes the other follow-ups that #10695 left out of scope:
How the values follow the sources
backdate_parameterscarries each parameter's earliest value back to 2015, so PE-US uses the 2018 values for 2015-2017, apart from Minnesota's base, which keeps its 2014-2017 values.The PR also corrects main's value for the year it represents:
Where sources disagree
The PR adds eight source conflicts to
source_conflicts/candidates.yaml, with captures undersource_conflicts/sources/. PE-US follows the statute in six, the Georgia Department of Labor's assigned rate in one, and the Massachusetts Department of Unemployment Assistance (DUA) in the one that stays open:us-ga:ui-new-employer-rate-2023us-ma:ui-new-employer-schedule-in-force(open)us-ne:ui-new-employer-rate-2022us-ok:ui-taxable-wage-base-2026us-va:ui-new-employer-rate-2018-pool-chargeus-vi:ui-new-employer-rate-payroll-variationus-wa:ui-new-employer-minimum-rateus-wy:ui-new-employer-rate-2023-averageValues that rest on DOL compilations
Model change
select_state_unemployment_tax_parameternow reads each parameter only for the jurisdictions a simulation covers. Most parameters now start in 2018, andbackdate_parameterscarries them back only to 2015. Main's selector, which read all 53, would fail any earlier simulation; the new one keeps main's 2014 Minnesota test passing on Minnesota's 2014 wage base.In PE-US,
ok_ui_meets_alternate_wages_testcompares an Oklahoma claimant's base-period wages with Oklahoma's taxable wage base, so in 2026 a claimant passes it at $24,200 rather than $25,000. No other benefit variable reads the payroll unemployment parameters.Tests
56 new YAML files hold 599 cases that apply the published rates and bases. Besides one file per jurisdiction, they cover New Jersey's employer additional payroll tax (TDI and workforce fund), Rhode Island's Job Development Fund tax and Alaska's employee contribution. The Minnesota and IRS payroll files, Oklahoma's UI alternate wage test and the St. Louis case in
test_payroll_contributions.pytake the new values.test_employer_state_payroll_tax_history_invariants.pykeeps its own copy of every published rate and base and checks, without a simulation, that:Hypothesis draws batches of one to twelve workers, each with wages, a raise and a jurisdiction, and a seeded population puts two workers in every jurisdiction. For every worker in 2018, 2022 and 2026:
The batches cover anywhere from one jurisdiction to all 53, so these checks also show that a worker's taxes do not depend on which other jurisdictions share the simulation.
Both branches ran back to back on one machine (Python 3.14.7, four threads):
The 54 new state files join their own states' batches in Full Suite - Baseline (states-shard-1 to 4). Puerto Rico's and the Virgin Islands' files join rest-b, the IRS file stays in irs, and the invariants test runs in the Rest Python
coregroup.Effect on employer payroll taxes
Across the 53 jurisdictions, an employer pays these mean state payroll taxes on one worker who earns $15,000 or $60,000 in 2019 dollars, amounts PE-US moves to each year with its CPI-U series:
At $15,000 the mean rises 3-8% in every year. At $60,000 it falls 10-12% in 2018-2020, since those years' wage bases fall short of the 2024 bases main used, and rises 4-6% from 2024. Alaska also collects an employee contribution of $73.85 to $97.31 a year at $15,000 and $197.50 to $271.00 at $60,000.
By jurisdiction and year
$15,000 in 2019 dollars
The worker earns $14,770.87 in 2018, $15,000.00 in 2019, $15,372.99 in 2020, $15,588.17 in 2021, $16,754.15 in 2022, $17,828.11 in 2023, $18,461.22 in 2024, $19,014.95 in 2025 and $19,462.00 in 2026. Each cell gives main's tax and, where this PR changes it, the new tax in bold.
AL, CA, DC, FL, IN, IA, MS, NE, NV, NC, OK, SD, TN, TX and VI keep main's tax in every year.
$60,000 in 2019 dollars
The worker earns $59,083.48 in 2018, $60,000.00 in 2019, $61,491.94 in 2020, $62,352.69 in 2021, $67,016.59 in 2022, $71,312.45 in 2023, $73,844.87 in 2024, $76,059.78 in 2025 and $77,848.02 in 2026. Each cell gives main's tax and, where this PR changes it, the new tax in bold.
AL, CA, DC, FL, IN, MS, NE, SD, TN and TX keep main's tax in every year.
Axiom
axiom: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2083 (AK), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2084 (AL), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2085 (AR), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2086 (AZ), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2087 (CA), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2088 (CO), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2089 (CT), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2090 (DC), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2091 (DE), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2092 (FL), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2093 (GA), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2094 (HI), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2095 (IA), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2096 (ID), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2097 (IL), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2098 (IN), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2099 (KS), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2100 (KY), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2101 (LA), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2102 (MA), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2103 (MD), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2104 (ME), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2105 (MI), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2106 (MO), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2107 (MS), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2108 (MT), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2109 (NC), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2110 (ND), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2111 (NE), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2112 (NH), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2113 (NJ), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2114 (NM), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2115 (NV), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2116 (NY), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2117 (OH), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2118 (OK), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2119 (OR), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2120 (PA), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2121 (PR), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2122 (RI), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2123 (SC), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2124 (SD), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2125 (TN), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2126 (TX), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2127 (UT), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2128 (VA), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2129 (VI), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2130 (VT), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2131 (WA), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2132 (WI), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2133 (WV), TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#2134 (WY), all new, and TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-us#1858 (MN, extended); all 53 queued
All 53 wait for axiom-corpus to ingest and release the 2018-2026 sources. axiom-corpus#986 asks for them, and a comment on axiom-corpus#916 adds the one Minnesota provision missing from that issue's request. Each issue quotes the law it would encode and carries companion tests that use the same published values as the YAML tests here.
Follow-ups
us-ma:ui-new-employer-schedule-in-force.#10695, #10285, #10294, #10674 and #10675 edit the same payroll aggregators; whichever lands second rebases.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code