Quote Quoting PayrolGuy
View Post
Other than the OP adding what is three different responses in one post it makes sense to me.

ukrkoz,

Your in-law needs to do nothing at all other than provide the state the information regarding the termination as requested. The charge mentioned is a charge against the in-law's ESD account and isn't something he has to pay.
I agree. You and the in-laws are confused about what the letter means. Your in-law paid into the unemployment insurance system and now his former employee is drawing against that insurance. It might have resulted in higher unemployment taxes for your in-law had he kept the business going, but since he did not, it won't effect him.

However, he needs to do whatever his state requires to officially shut down his business and shut down his payroll account and unemployment accounts with the state.