A new Nebraska state law was enacted that expands the coverage of contractors within the state. The new law, LB 1001, modifies the current tax bond requirement for contractors to inflate its coverage. Currently, the surety bond is required before the start of any work on a contract and is conditioned to guarantee the payment of all taxes when due, as well as contributions due under the Employment Security Law that accumulate in connection with the contract. LB 1001 broadens this guarantee to protect any withholding required under the Nebraska Revenue Act of 1967. Existing law demands that the required surety bond be no less than $5,000. The new law also states that failure to reach the conditions of the existing law or releasing withholdings to a subcontractor without authorization from the Department of Revenue makes the contractor legally responsible for the full amount of the required bond that the subcontractor acquired. The contractor may decrease their liability to the point that they can prove that the subcontractor has paid the mandatory taxes and contributions to the state and its political subdivisions.
-
Nebraska Contract Tax Bond
November 12, 2009 by Eric WeisbrotCategory: Commercial Bonds, Surety NewsTags: bond requirements, contractors, legislation, NE, Nebraska, surety bond, tax bond | Comments (0)
-
New Mexico Contractor License Bond
November 9, 2009 by Eric Weisbrot
Enacted on 02/28/2008, a new law referred to as HB 199 was put in place in the state of New Mexico. HB 199 cancels the existing contractors’ license bond requirement under which the bond amounts are minor and based on the size of projects completed; the law also substitutes it with a $10,000 bond from a state licensed surety. Payments from the surety bond can solely be used to cure code breaches of a licensee. Any claims made opposing the bond must be within two years after the final inspection or within two years of issue of a certificate of occupancy, whichever is sooner. The entire aggregate liability of the surety can not surpass the face amount of the surety bond; there is also a 30 day cancellation condition. The final language of the new law is considerably enhanced from the original bill draft. Multiple groups worked on the new bill including SFAA, AIA and CNA Surety. Category: Commercial Bonds, Contractor License Bonds, Surety NewsTags: bond requirements, Contractor License Bonds, contractors, legislation, South Dakota, surety bond | Comments (0)
-
California Contractor’s License Bond Amendment
August 17, 2009 by Lisa Grimsley
The SB 1432, which became effective on January 1, 2009, amended California’s law for claims toward home improvement contractors. The new law states that a homeowner may make a claim against the contractor’s bond only if the damages happened when the homeowner did not intend on selling the home. The law also makes a change to the time limit of making the claim, based on the contractor’s licensing period.Category: Commercial Bonds, Contractor License Bonds, Surety NewsTags: bond requirements, ca, california, contractor, Contractor License Bonds, contractors, legislation, surety bond | Comments (0)
-
Alabama Bid Bond Changes
May 27, 2009 by Tracy Konopka
On 5/16/08, the state of Alabama has enacted HB 442. The enactment allows state agencies to decide if a bid bond is required for service contracts or supplies. The prior law made bid bonds mandatory, which allowed for no flexibility, even when no bonding companies were willing to bond the work.Category: Bid Bonds, Surety NewsTags: alabama, bid bond, bond requirements, contract bond, contractors, legislation | Comments (0)
-
Stimulus Package: Pros & Cons For The Construction Industry
February 24, 2009 by Michael WeisbrotThe stimulus package is absolutely gigantic. So much so, I thought I would create a list of pros and cons related to the construction industry pertaining to the bill. Many of the cons are items that the industry was pushing for, but did not get.
Overall, the bill looks like a victory for the construction and surety industries. See below for details.
PROS: CONS: The biggest investment in infrastructure for 50+ years No specified amount for school construction Passed with $8 billion towards high-speed rail (previous Senate version included $2 billion, while previous House version included $0) “State fiscal-stabilization� funds cannot be used for new construction of schools, only modernization General Stimulus: $110.7 billion (35%) is appropriated for projects in 2010 General Stimulus: Only $34.8 billion (11%) of the $308.3 billion will be spent on “shovel-ready� projects by 9/30/09, the fiscal year end for 2009 Infrastructure Stimulus: 50% of funds spent on work to be started within 120 days of the enactment “Use it or lose it� policy for DOT, a 50% expenditure for within 120 days “Use it or lose it� policy is not in force for the following departments, but they must report to Congress on how they are spending their funds:
DOD & VA – 30 days
GSA – 45 days“Build Americaâ€? tax-credit bonds can be issued by local and state governments in 2009 & 2010 Small businesses may deduct income up to $250K of capital expenditures as well as a 50% deduction on depreciable assets (e.g. construction equipment) Businesses can carry 08’ operating losses to offset profits from previous years Only companies with less than $15 million in revenue can qualify A bill that requires public companies to withhold 3% of their contracts will no longer be effective for 2011 The bill will be effective for 2012 Category: Contract Bonds, General Bonding, Other, Surety NewsTags: construction, construction industry, contractor, contractors, legislation, stimulus package | Comments (0)
