News of the Day

The latest single-housing permit numbers show that new home construction is up ten percent at the end of 2020 compared to the end of 2019.

The data, compiled by information required to be submitted by municipalities to the Department of Safety and Professional Services, shows 12,291 new home permits were issued across the state in 2020 compared to 11,207 in 2019.

Quarter four is down slightly compared to quarter three, with 3,392 permits issued in quarter four of 2020 and 3,825 permits issued in quarter three.

“We are thrilled with the yearly increase in building permits,” said Wisconsin Builders Association (WBA) Executive Director Brad Boycks. “Our industry is one that was not shut down in the early part of the year. The ability to continue building homes for people across the state was a significant factor in this great increase, and further helps the other industries impacted by homebuilding.”

Other encouraging numbers, released by the Department of Administration, includes the numbers of plats and lots approved through December of 2020; 204 and 5,447, respectively. In 2019, there were 152 plats and 4,593 lots approved.

Without action from state lawmakers and Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, many small businesses in Wisconsin may have to pay unexpected state taxes on loans taken out under the federal Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).

The news comes less than a month after Congress created a legislative fix to the same issue on the federal level, ensuring that businesses would not have to pay additional federal taxes on their PPP loans. Those changes came in the latest round of coronavirus relief that was signed into law in late December.

But in a notice posted on its website Friday, the state Department of Revenue clarified that Wisconsin law adheres to prior PPP restrictions, meaning small businesses will not be able to deduct those expenses from their state taxes.

That means small businesses, many of which are under immense financial strain amid the COVID-19 economic downturn, could have to pay state taxes on their PPP loans unless the state Legislature and Evers intervene.

Terry Hoover, a partner at the Appleton offices of the accounting and consulting firm Wipfli, said the cost to businesses will vary depending on the size of their PPP loan and how the business is organized. For a sole proprietor, for example, Hoover estimates businesses could face an extra $6,000 to $8,000 for every $100,000 worth of expenses a business isn’t able to deduct.

If no legislative action is taken by April 15, many businesses will be required to begin paying state taxes on their PPP loans, according to Hoover. But he added that some businesses have already been affected by the confusion, including at least seven businesses at Wipfli alone.

“So now they wake up to find on Friday morning that they actually have underpaid their Wisconsin taxes, and so have to amend those returns and pay in more, plus interest at 12 percent,” Hoover said. “Or they can wait and hope for the best that the Legislature acts to retroactively (bring Wisconsin into alignment with federal law) to avoid having to do that.”

The Small Business Administration and the Treasury Department are preparing to revive the PPP five months after its first two rounds of funding ended.

In the latest round, businesses that received loans last year will be able to borrow up to $2 million as long as they have no more than 300 employees and suffered at least a 25% drop in quarterly revenue. First-time borrowers with no more than 500 workers will be able to borrow up to $10 million.

The loans, which can be forgiven, will have five-year terms and carry an interest rate of 1%.

The SBA will initially accept only applications submitted by community financial institutions, or CFIs, lenders whose customers are minority-owned and economically disadvantaged businesses. Starting Monday, applications for first-time borrowers submitted by these lenders will accepted, and on Wednesday, applications for second loans. The SBA said it would begin accepting applications from all its lenders within a few days of that initial period reserved for CFIs.

As with the first two rounds of the PPP, applications must be submitted online at banks and other SBA-approved lenders. All applications must be submitted and approved by March 31. Loan amounts are calculated using a company’s payroll expenses; businesses can use either their 2019 or 2020 payroll to compute how much they can ask for.

Companies will have 24 weeks from the date they receive a loan to use the money. While 60% of the proceeds must be used for payroll in order for loans to be forgiven, companies can use the rest for employee health benefits, mortgage interest, rent, utilities and expenses that are essential to business operations.

The PPP is being restarted under the coronavirus relief bill Congress approved in late December, providing for $284 billion in new loans. The first two rounds, which began April 3 and ended Aug. 8, gave out more than 5.2 million loans worth $525 billion.

Interim UW System President Tommy Thompson told WISN 12 the schools could help administer the vaccine to all Wisconsin residents.

Thompson said if allowed, the mass vaccinations could be done by the end of March or early April.

“We could set it up on our campuses,” Thompson said. “We could take care of the vaccine and keep it at the necessary temperatures to keep it safe. We have nursing students, nursing deans, individuals qualified to administer vaccines. We could do it the same way as testing and vaccinate as many people as needed.”

The former Wisconsin governor and Health and Human Services Secretary said he has contacted state and federal agencies about his mass vaccination plan.

“We think we could really be helpful. That’s why we’ve volunteered the university system,” he said.

Thompson said he has not yet received approval to move forward.

He added that vaccine manufacturers would need to send the doses directly to UW system officials.

A Jan. 3 White House Coronavirus Task Force report obtained by ABC News recommends Wisconsin vaccinate as many residents as soon as possible.

“Do not delay the rapid immunization of those over 65 and vulnerable to severe disease; recommend creation of high throughput vaccination sites with use of EMT personnel to monitor for potential anaphylaxis and fully utilize nursing students. No vaccines should be in freezers but should instead be put in arms now; active and aggressive immunization in the face of this surge would save lives,” the report said.

The Department of Workforce Development (DWD) today announced plans to make it easier for Wisconsinites to file for unemployment insurance (UI) benefits by updating the language for both its initial and weekly UI claim applications.

DWD is currently seeking public input on the updated draft application questions online at https://dwd.wisconsin.gov/uiapplicationsfeedback/.

To improve the UI application process, DWD has updated the questions to feature “plain language” as much as possible. “Plain language” is meant to be understandable to all individuals who are likely to use the UI application process, regardless of educational background or regional/cultural language differences. Further, it is to ensure all those who are filling out either an initial or weekly UI claim can understand the questions as quickly and easily as possible.

The deadline to submit public comment on the draft questions is January 8, 2021. DWD job centers will also host virtual focus groups with selected volunteers from around the state to collect additional feedback on the application process. The Department will review and incorporate all feedback before it begins the necessary IT programming in February and plans to post the updated web applications in March.

After months of stalemate, Congress struck a deal on nearly $900 billion in Covid-19 relief, including a new round of direct payments and help for jobless Americans, families and businesses struggling in the pandemic.

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday in another case that could reframe the power of state government to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, reviving a debate that began when justices struck down the state’s “Safer at Home” order in May.

The latest dispute stems from an order restricting bar and restaurant capacity that expired more than a month ago, but it raises issues the court left ambiguous in its “Safer at Home” ruling.

Gov. Tony Evers’ administration issued the order on Oct. 6 through powers invoked by state Department of Health Services Secretary Andrea Palm to respond to public health emergencies.

Palm’s order restricted the size of crowds at indoor businesses like restaurants and bars. Under the order, those businesses were limited to 25 percent of their usual capacity. For example, a restaurant that could normally hold up to 200 people would be limited to a crowd of 50.

The Evers administration argues there’s a key difference in this case.

When the court struck down “Safer at Home,” it carved out an exception, stating without explanation in two footnotes in the majority opinion that it was not striking down the state’s powers to close schools.

The law that spells out the power to close schools states that DHS “may close schools and forbid public gatherings in schools, churches, and other places to control outbreaks and epidemics.” The Evers administration argues that Palm’s latest order did just that.

Critics of Palm’s order argue it should be struck down because it relies on part of the same law that the Supreme Court addressed when it struck down “Safer at Home.”

“We have the same agency here. We have the same pandemic. They are repackaging these same exact arguments they made the last time,” said attorney Misha Tseytlin arguing on behalf of the Mix Up, Inc., an Amery bar and grill challenging Palm’s order. “I understand the composition of this court has changed since, but the law hasn’t changed.”

The Federal Reserve kept its benchmark interest rate at a record low near zero Thursday and signaled its readiness to do more if needed to support an economy under threat from a worsening coronavirus pandemic.

The central bank’s policy statement Thursday was approved on a 10-0 vote. Robert Kaplan, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, who had dissented at the previous meeting, voted with the majority this time. Another dissenter in September, Neel Kashkari, head of the Minneapolis Fed, was absent, with his alternate, Mary Daly of the San Francisco Fed, approving the statement.

The statement was nearly identical to the one the Fed issued in September. At that meeting, it adopted a policy goal change it had made in August to keep rates low for some period of time even after inflation hits its 2% annual target. The reason was to allow the Fed to supply a longer boost to the economy and for unemployment to fall further before the policymakers begin to worry about inflation.

Congressional leaders said Tuesday night they are making progress on a sweeping deal to fund the government and provide coronavirus relief but hadn’t yet clinched an agreement.

The top four congressional leaders met twice Tuesday as they race the clock to try to fund the government by Friday and break a months-long stalemate to provide more coronavirus aid.

The bipartisan package was split into two different bills. One $748 billion piece includes another round of Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) assistance for small businesses, an unemployment benefit and more money for schools, vaccine distribution and other widely agreed upon items.

The second, $160 billion piece ties together the two most controversial elements of the coronavirus negotiations: more money for state and local governments and protections from coronavirus-related lawsuits.