Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 56 / Thursday, March 25, 2021 / Proposed Rules VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act RFA
Analysis
IX. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

29 CFR Part 578

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104121 1996, requires Federal agencies engaged in rulemaking to consider the impact of their proposals on small entities, consider alternatives to minimize that impact, and solicit public comment on their analyses. The RFA requires the assessment of the impact of a regulation on a wide range of small entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
Accordingly, the Department examined this proposed rule to determine whether it would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The most recent data on private sector entities at the time this NPRM
was drafted are from the 2017 Statistics of U.S. Businesses SUSB.24 The Department limited this analysis to a few industries that were acknowledged to have tipped workers in the 2020 Tip final rule. These industries are classified under the North American Industry Classification System NAICS as 713210 Casinos, 721110 Hotels and Motels, 722410 Drinking Places Alcoholic Beverages, 722511 Fullservice Restaurants, 722513 Limited Service Restaurants, and 722515 Snack and Nonalcoholic Beverage Bars. The SUSB reports that these industries have 503,915 private firms and 661,198
private establishments. Of these, 501,322 firms and 554,088
establishments have fewer than 500
employees.
The per-entity cost for small business employers is the regulatory familiarization cost of $12.65, or the fully loaded mean hourly wage of a Compensation, Benefits, and Job Analysis Specialist $50.60 multiplied by 14 hour fifteen minutes. Because this cost is minimal for small business entities, and well below one percent of their gross annual revenues, which is typically at least $100,000 per year for the smallest businesses, the Department certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Department welcomes any comments and data on this Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis, including the costs and benefits of this proposed rule on small entities.

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 UMRA 25 requires agencies to prepare a written statement for rules with a Federal mandate that may result in increased expenditures by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $165 million $100 million in 1995
dollars adjusted for inflation or more in at least one year.26 This statement must:
1 Identify the authorizing legislation;
2 present the estimated costs and benefits of the rule and, to the extent that such estimates are feasible and relevant, its estimated effects on the national economy; 3 summarize and evaluate state, local, and tribal government input; and 4 identify reasonable alternatives and select, or explain the non-selection, of the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative. This proposed rule is not expected to result in increased expenditures by the private sector or by state, local, and tribal governments of $165 million or more in any one year.

29 CFR Part 579

X. Executive Order 13132, Federalism The Department has 1 reviewed this proposed rescission in accordance with Executive Order 13132 regarding federalism and 2 determined that it does not have federalism implications.
The proposed rule would not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
XI. Executive Order 13175, Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule would not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
List of Subjects 29 CFR Part 516
Minimum wages, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wages.
29 CFR Part 531
Wages.
25 See
24 Statistics
of U.S. Businesses 2017, https
www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/susb/2017susb-annual.html, 2016 SUSB Annual Data Tables by Establishment Industry.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:19 Mar 24, 2021

Jkt 253001

2 U.S.C. 1501.
using growth in the Gross Domestic Product deflator from 1995 to 2019. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Table 1.1.9. Implicit Price Deflators for Gross Domestic Product.
26 Calculated
PO 00000

Frm 00028

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

15827

Penalties, Wages.
Child labor, Penalties.
29 CFR Part 580
Administrative practice and procedure, Child labor, Penalties, Wages.
For the reasons set forth above, the Department proposes to amend title 29, parts 578, 579, and 580 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 578TIP RETENTION, MINIMUM
WAGE, AND OVERTIME
VIOLATIONSCIVIL MONEY
PENALTIES
1. The authority citation for part 578
is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 29 U.S.C. 216e, as amended by sec. 9, Pub. L. 101157, 103 Stat. 938, sec.
3103, Pub. L. 101508, 104 Stat. 138829, sec. 302a, Pub. L. 110233, 122 Stat. 920, and sec. 1201, Div. S., Tit. XII, Pub. L. 115
141, 132 Stat. 348; Pub. L. 101410, 104 Stat.
890 28 U.S.C. 2461 note, as amended by sec. 31001s, Pub. L. 104134, 110 Stat.
1321358, 1321373, and sec. 701, Pub. L.
11474, 129 Stat 584.

2. The heading of part 578 is revised to read as set forth above.
3. Revise 578.3 to read as follows:

578.3 What types of violations may result in a penalty being assessed?

a In general. 1 A penalty of up to $1,162 per violation may be assessed against any person who violates section 3m2B of the Act.
2 A penalty of up to $2,074 per violation may be assessed against any person who repeatedly or willfully violates section 6 minimum wage or section 7 overtime of the Act. The amount of the penalties stated in paragraphs a1 and 2 of this section will be determined by applying the criteria in 578.4.
b Repeated violations. An employers violation of section 6 or section 7 of the Act shall be deemed to be repeated for purposes of this section:
1 Where the employer has previously violated section 6 or section 7 of the Act, provided the employer has previously received notice, through a responsible official of the Wage and Hour Division or otherwise authoritatively, that the employer allegedly was in violation of the provisions of the Act; or 2 Where a court or other tribunal has made a finding that an employer has previously violated section 6 or section 7 of the Act, unless an appeal therefrom
E:FRFM25MRP1.SGM

25MRP1